Agenda of Whau Local Board - Wednesday, 23 February 2022

At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.

Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other external interest they might have.

Specifically, members are asked to identify any new interests they have not previously disclosed, an interest that might be considered as a conflict of interest with a matter on the agenda.

The following are declared interests of the Whau Local Board:

Member

Organisation

Position

Kay Thomas

· New Lynn Citizens Advice Bureau

· Friends of Arataki

· Western Quilters

· Citizens Advice Bureau
Waitākere Board

Volunteer

Committee member

Member

Chair

Susan Zhu

· Chinese Oral History Foundation

· The Chinese Garden Steering Committee of Auckland

Committee member

Board member

Fasitua Amosa

· Equity NZ

· Massive Theatre Company

· Avondale Business Association

Vice President

Board member

A family member is the Chair

Catherine Farmer

· Avondale-Waterview Historical Society

· Blockhouse Bay Historical Society

· Portage Licensing Trust

· Blockhouse Bay Bowls

· Forest and Bird organisation

· Grey Power

Member

Trustee

Patron

Member

Te’eva Matafai

· Pacific Events and Entertainment Trust

· Miss Samoa NZ

· Malu Measina Samoan Dance Group

· Aspire Events

Co-Founder

Director

Director/Founder

Director

Warren Piper

· New Lynn RSA

· New Lynn Business Association

Associate member

Member

Jessica Rose

· Women in Urbanism-Aotearoa, Auckland Branch

· Forest & Bird

· Big Feels Club

· Frocks on Bikes

· Bike Auckland

· Department of Conservation

Committee member

Member

Patron

Former co-chair

Former committee member

Employee

Member appointments

Local board members are appointed to the following bodies. In these appointments the local board members represent Auckland Council.

External organisation	Leads	Alternate
Aircraft Noise Community Consultative Group	Warren Piper	Catherine Farmer
Avondale Business Association	Kay Thomas	Warren Piper
Blockhouse Bay Business Association	Warren Piper	Fasitua Amosa
New Lynn Business Association	Susan Zhu	Kay Thomas Warren Piper
Rosebank Business Association	Fasitua Amosa	Warren Piper
Whau Coastal Walkway Environmental Trust	Fasitua Amosa	Jessica Rose

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Whau Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Wednesday 8 December 2021, as true and correct.

5 Leave of Absence

At the close of the agenda no requests for leave of absence had been received.

6 Acknowledgements

At the close of the agenda no requests for acknowledgements had been received.

7 Petitions

At the close of the agenda no requests to present petitions had been received.

8 Deputations

Standing Order 7.7 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are required to give seven working days notice of subject matter and applications are approved by the Chairperson of the Whau Local Board. This means that details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda. Total speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.

At the close of the agenda no requests for deputations had been received.

9 Public Forum

A period of time (approximately 30 minutes) is set aside for members of the public to address the meeting on matters within its delegated authority. A maximum of 3 minutes per item is allowed, following which there may be questions from members.

At the close of the agenda no requests for public forum had been received.

10 Extraordinary Business

Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

“An item that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with at that meeting if-

(a) The local authority by resolution so decides; and

(b) The presiding member explains at the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public,-

(i) The reason why the item is not on the agenda; and

(ii) The reason why the discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.”

Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

“Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-

(a) That item may be discussed at that meeting if-

(i) That item is a minor matter relating to the general business of the local authority; and

(ii) the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that the item will be discussed at the meeting; but

(b) no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for further discussion.”

11 Notices of Motion

Under Standing Order 2.5.1 a Notice of Motion has been received from Member J Rose and Chair K Thomas for consideration under item 13.

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Notice of Motion: Member J Rose to recommend that Auckland Council adopt the Waka Kotahi "Guidelines for restricting traffic for Play Streets events"	11
b ⇩	Notice of Motion: Community Play Streets Pilot for Tamaki Makaurau	21

Whau Local Board

23 February 2022

Whau Local Path Plan (Greenways) Review 2021

File No.: CP2022/01297

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To adopt the Whau Local Path Plan (Greenways) Review document and endorse the priority routes identified.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Active transport connections within and between parks, often referred to as greenways or local paths, provide numerous benefits to local communities. These include improved physical and mental health and wellbeing, as well as other social, economic and environmental benefits.

3. Analysis of the network of active transport opportunities across an entire local board area enables prioritisation of routes for future development to build a robust network of local paths that serve local communities.

4. In financial year 2019/2020, the Whau Local Board commissioned a review of the existing Whau Greenways Plan (2015). This was carried forward into the current financial year for completion.

5. The review included an assessment of the existing greenways plan to understand what has been completed in the six years since the original plan was adopted. Consideration was given to the current context of growth and a rapidly developing spine of active transport routes to determine updated priorities for future implementation.

6. A full map of local path connections and opportunities has been developed, as well as a prioritised list of nine routes considered most important for delivery.

7. A specialist consultant worked with both Auckland Council and Auckland Transport staff to undertake this review, with additional input from the local board and from mana whenua.

8. Continued support from the Whau Local Board to develop local paths within the local board area will result in increased opportunities for active transport and recreation, as well as improved health and wellbeing for the local community.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Whau Local Board:

a) adopt the Whau Local Path Plan (Greenways) Review (2021) as presented in Attachment A to this report.

b) endorse the nine priority routes identified within the Whau Local Path Plan (Greenways) Review (2021).

Horopaki

Context

9. Auckland’s walking and cycling connections have become increasingly popular in the past decade, with Auckland Transport showing increasing patronage as the network has grown.

10. Active transport connections running through and between parks and locations of interest within a community are known to provide numerous benefits to users. These include social, economic and environmental benefits.

11. These connections have been shown to increase the physical and mental health and wellbeing of users, and also support social cohesion by linking communities, enhancing community ownership, and promoting social equity.

12. In addition, they can provide direct economic benefit through higher productivity of workers, via direct employment, increased positive publicity, access to businesses, and reduced vehicular costs.

13. When implemented effectively, these connections can also enhance and protect the natural environment by providing wildlife corridors and habitat, reducing flooding risk and sedimentation, and reducing carbon emissions.

14. The Whau Local Board commissioned and formally adopted the Whau Greenways Plan in 2015, outlining a possible future network of greenways routes. This was one of the earlier documents of its kind in Auckland, and Greenways Plans are now in place for 19 of Auckland’s 21 local board areas.

15. The 2015 plan detailed a connected network of safe walking and cycling paths used by the local community for active transport and recreation, underpinned by a desire to improve the local ecology and contribute to environmental restoration.

16. Some sections of the 2015 plan have been completed or are in delivery. A strong backbone of core cycling infrastructure is now developing, centered around the Te Whau Pathway and the New Lynn to Avondale shared path.

17. The Whau Local Path Plan (Greenways) Review aimed to prioritise routes for future delivery, based on four key principles detailed in paragraph 19 of this report. This will help the local board to direct investment into those connections which will offer the greatest benefit.

18. The review also provides an opportunity to also consider complementary strategic documents that were not in place in 2015, including the Unitary Plan, Auckland Transport Network Plans, Greenways Plans developed in neighboring local board areas, as well as an updated Local Board Plan from 2020.

19. The document has shifted to the term ‘Local Paths’ as opposed to ‘Greenways’ as it is more commonly used today by both council and Auckland Transport. Local paths better describe a network of pleasant green paths within and between parks and along quiet local streets and roads which aim to make local destinations accessible.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

20. Nine local path routes have been identified as priority routes based on their alignment to the following key prioritisation principles:

· Route builds off the existing or soon-to-be delivered network of active transport routes. This includes:

o Waterview Shared Path

o Te Whau Pathway

o New Lynn to Avondale Shared Path.

· Route helps to enable community connections. This includes:

o better connections to schools

o better connections to town centres

o better connections to community facilities.

· Route helps to connect people with their local parks and with nature. This includes:

o better access to local parks

o better connections between parks.

· Route enables a safe, low-speed connection to provide confidence to people with less experience cycling on roads.

21. The nine priority routes considered as most important for future delivery in alignment with these key principles are as follows:

· Te Whau Pathway

· New Lynn to Avondale

· Onewherowhero (Kelston)

· Manawa to Avondale

· Pukehuhu (Miranda)

· Blockhouse Bay

· Green Bay

· Whakaputanga

· Rewarewa (from Fruitvale)

22. Commentary within the document outlines the context of each of the priority routes, benefits that the route would help to achieve, and several priority actions for future delivery or local board advocacy.

23. Additional opportunities outside of these nine priority routes have been included in the route analysis tables (section 4 pp. 21-32), and the combined local path maps (section 5 pp.33-34).

24. Some of the actions identified to improve the network may be too expensive to be delivered by the local board alone or sit outside their remit. Therefore, actions related to each route have been split into either fund, advocate, or activate, referring to the suggested action recommended to be taken by the local board.

25. Actions identified for priority routes will require subsequent feasibility and design investigations to determine the cost and specifics of implementation, and to inform budget allocation. Public feedback should also be sought as each action is progressed.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

26. It is expected that improvements made to local path routes would increase the usage of these connections for active transport, providing alternative active transport networks.

27. Provision of these opportunities will help to foster behaviour change, whereby active transport becomes a more common occurrence, and people are less reliant on vehicular transport. This reduces carbon emissions and increases the adaptive capacity to mitigate against the impacts of climate change.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

28. Auckland Transport (AT) was consulted throughout the review, including the development of the plan where they had particular input during the prioritisation stage. Specific feedback was received from the Transport Planning for Walking and Cycling team.

29. Several changes were made to the document to ensure alignment with the AT Cycle and Micro Mobility Network, currently under development. In addition, some of the suggestions from this document were given consideration for inclusion in wider AT planning.

30. The advice outlined within this assessment will assist council departments and CCO’s undertaking development of local paths in the future. In particular, this should enable Community Facilities and Auckland Transport to prioritise future investment into the network of active transport routes in the Whau Local Board area.

31. Where relevant, engagement was undertaken with other council delivery partners, including Eke Panuku Development Auckland for the Avondale area.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

32. The Whau Local Board allocated $15,000 from their LDI operating expenditure budget towards the Local Path Plan Review in June 2019 (resolution number WH/2019/82). This was partially carried forward into this financial year for completion (resolution number WH/2020/94).

33. Workshops were held with the Whau Local Board to discuss the project scope in August 2019 and to provide an initial update in March 2020. Feedback was sought on priority routes in September 2020, and the final draft document was discussed with the local board in March 2021 and again in July 2021 during workshops.

34. The local board were supportive of the initial and final draft plans, and provided the following feedback:

· flagged specific actions already actively being considered by Auckland Transport, or those which had been considered in previous terms.

· identified one area of possible concern as the section of route 8 running along Golf Road and requested that an assessment be undertaken to ensure safety and appropriateness. This investigation confirmed the feasibility of a safe connection here in the future and determined that alternative routes here would provide reduced benefit.

· helped to identify a number of key stakeholders to provide input into the plan, including prominent local cyclists and cycling advocates. Their feedback was incorporated within the plan.

35. Delivery of priority routes identified in the plan will help to meet several objectives identified within the Whau Local Board Plan 2020, including Outcome Three, “everyone in the Whau has opportunities for active and passive recreation in our parks and open spaces” and Outcome Four, “More safe, attractive and high-quality walking and cycling connections are developed in the Whau”.

36. Specifically, this responds directly to a key initiative from the plan to “progress the review and implementation of the Whau Neighbourhood Greenways Plan and prioritise walking and cycling connections between parks and open spaces”.

37. Further investment into the active transport network will provide a number of benefits for local communities. Improved infrastructure will result in increased usage for both recreation and active transport purposes, resulting in a community who are ‘more active more often’, and healthier as a result.

38. To enable identification of a holistic and strategic network of local paths, the views of the wider public were not sought during the development of the plan. It is expected that as actions identified within the plan are progressed that the views of the public will be included to help shape the details of delivery.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

39. Local Paths will help to connect Māori communities together, fostering an increased social cohesion and more robust communities. Active transport is an equitable form of transport in that it is free, and able to be enjoyed by most people. This will enable Māori, who are overrepresented in many deprivation metrics and thus less likely to be able to easily travel from place to place, to maintain and develop social networks and access cultural sites, sites of spiritual or historical significance, and community facilities such as marae.

40. By reducing emissions and delivering infrastructure which considers nature and the impacts of climate change, the whenua will be protected, and better able to maintain and sustain its mana. This is integral to Te Ao Māori world view.

41. The project was outlined to Mana Whenua at the Park, Sports and Recreation Kaitiaki Forum in August 2021. The project was met with support from all mana whenua present, and no specific actions related to Māori were identified at this hui.

42. The document identifies potential future projects for continued implementation of the greenways plan. Mana Whenua will be engaged to provide cultural input when relevant projects are initiated.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

43. Adopting the plan will have no immediate financial implication for the local board. This document helps to prioritise future investment by the local board and other delivery partners such as Auckland Transport and New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) into local path connections in the Whau.

44. No cost estimates were produced for any of the actions identified within the report. Relevant council teams such as Community Facilities, and Council-Controlled Organisations (CCO’s) such as AT will need to undertake subsequent investigation and design to inform budget requirements in future work programmes.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

45. Residents of the Whau Local Board area could possibly interpret the maps within this document as a map of safe cycling routes. However, the overall purpose of this document is to identify strategic routes for future investment. A separate ‘Local Paths Promotion’ project has been suggested for future implementation to celebrate the current active transport network and mitigate this risk moving forward.

46. The identified priority routes are aspirational. It is likely that funding may not be made available to deliver all of the actions identified in the short term. However, any investment into the network will lead to overall benefits for local communities, and the local board can continue to build the network towards this end goal.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

47. Should the Whau Local Path Plan (Greenways) Review be adopted, priority routes will be implemented in a staged manner following further consultation with the Whau Local Board, further investigation, design and consultation, and capital funding allocation.

48. The Whau Local Board can continue to advocate for key actions identified within the plan to be delivered by other stakeholders, including NZTA and AT.

49. Staff will continue to work with the Whau Local Board and local community in future years to identify further opportunities to improve the network of active transport routes within the local board area.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Whau Local Path Plan (Greenways) Review 2021	109

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Thomas Dixon - Parks & Places Specialist

Authorisers

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Whau Local Board

23 February 2022

Whau Local Board Engagement Strategy

File No.: CP2022/01092

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval of the Whau Local Board three-year Engagement Strategy.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Local boards have a series of statutory responsibilities under the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009. This includes decision-making responsibility for community engagement, consultation and advocacy.

3. The purpose of the Whau Local Board Engagement Strategy is to set objectives to guide the local engagement and consultation programme. The engagement strategy will also enable delivery of the Whau Local Board Plan by guiding improvements to the engagement work undertaken by Council staff on behalf of the local board. This will guide the plans we develop for engaging and consulting the local community on special consultative procedures including for the annual plan, 10-year budget and the Whau Local Board Plan.

4. The engagement strategy seeks to demonstrate that Whau Local Board values diversity and inclusion through creating meaningful opportunities for engagement and participation with our local community, identifying and removing barriers to access in council processes, and being well-informed about who makes up our community. The local board is committed to improving Māori engagement through our Māori Responsiveness Framework.

5. Engagement will be evaluated to ensure effectiveness and to identify ongoing improvements.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Whau Local Board:

a) approve the Whau Local Board three-year Engagement Strategy.

Horopaki

Context

6. The Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 requires local boards to:

· communicate with community organisations

· communicate the interests and preferences of people in relation to strategies, policies, plans, and bylaws (to the governing body)

· use the local board plan process to provide an opportunity for people to participate in decision-making processes on the nature and level of local activities to be provided by council within the local board area.

7. The Local Government Act 2002 also establishes engagement principles:

· a local authority should conduct its business in an open, transparent, and democratically accountable manner and give effect to its identified priorities and desired outcomes in an efficient and effective manner.

· a local authority should make itself aware of, and should have regard to, the views of all its communities

· when making a decision, a local authority should take account of the diversity of the community, and the community’s interests, within its district or region; and the interest of future as well as current communities; and the likely impact of any decision on them

· a local authority should provide opportunities for Māori to contribute to its decision-making processes.

8. The Auckland Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy 2014:

· identifies how and when communities can expect to be engaged in, or specifically consulted on, decisions about issues, proposals, assets, decisions and activities

· enables the Council and our communities to understand the significance that Council places on certain issues, proposals, assets, decisions, and activities.

9. Whau Local Board has invested into long term engagement initiatives through the Ethnic Peoples Plan and the Pacific Peoples Plan. These plans identify diverse communities living in the local area. These plans are inclusive of youth and senior residents as well, who often aren’t represented highly in the engagement space. The Engagement Strategy is in alignment to these plans.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Analysis – Formal Engagement

10. In 2018 the population of the Whau Local Board area was 79,365. Whau Local Board area is ethnically diverse and is one of the few local board areas that is home to a large Asian and European community (40 per cent each), followed by Pacific (19 per cent) and Māori (10 per cent).

Low engagement – a key challenge

11. Demographic data from submissions on the 10‐year Budget 2018/2028 (which includes local board priorities for 2018/2019) and the Auckland Plan 2050 demonstrates the local community has a low level of engagement with Council and the Whau Local Board.

12. The low statistical trends have been similar throughout all types of engagement in the past year.

Other challenges

13. Numerous departments within Council undertake engagement with the community separately on various projects making it difficult to take a wholistic community-centric approach to engagement. Efforts to engage must be coordinated across departments to minimise costs and avoid saturation which can ‘turn off’ communities from remaining engaged.

14. The diverse capacities and capabilities of resident’s present challenges to effective engagement. This includes languages and grasp of English, which is the main language through which we conduct our business. Ongoing targeted capacity building can assist in enhancing the ability of communities to make the most of engagement opportunities and enabling them to be heard.

15. There will likely be many other challenges that we are not aware of so it will be important to continue to work with the community to identify barriers and seek to develop shared understandings and collective solutions to these.

16. There is a need to educate the wider community about the Auckland Governance model, the role of local boards as well as decisions that are the responsibility of the regional governing body and central government agencies. This can ensure residents are engaging with the right parts of council to address the right types of issues. Initiatives such as static display and videos are being designed to assist with addressing this challenge.

Advice

17. This strategy will guide delivery of engagement, consultation and communication initiatives in the local board area. The Engagement Strategy sets the following principles for all consultation, engagement and communication:

· the local board will conduct its business in an open, transparent, and accountable manner and meet its identified priorities and outcomes in an efficient and effective manner

· the local board will make itself aware of and carefully consider the views of all its communities

· the local board will provide opportunities for Māori to contribute to its decision-making processes.

18. Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy is embedded in this engagement strategy via multiple avenues including:

· Reporting on measures of success

· Calendarising upcoming engagement and communications opportunities

· Regular Engagement Opportunities led by the local board

· High quality and effective communications

· Efforts to engage those communities often less engaged

· Special efforts to engage with Māori, and

· Engagement with communities to enable effective advocacy.

19. The amount and timing of engagement activities each year will be dictated by the work programme of each electoral cycle and will include statutory processes (e.g. annual plan, local board plan), work programme project needs, etc. It will also be influenced by the availability of resources including staff capacity.

20. A coordinated approach to engagement will hopefully help us achieve other objectives eg greater youth representation, growing the database of people who receive notifications about Council activities and increase connections on social media platforms.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

21. The local board is committed to meaningful engagement and improving engagement in the Whau Local Board area. The local board recognises that new and innovative approaches will be needed including the use of digital strategies.

22. This Engagement Strategy has been developed by staff for the local board through the following activities facilitated by the Engagement Advisor:

· attending an initial engagement workshop in 2020 where the local board gave feedback and direction

· attending a subsequent engagement workshop in December 2021 at which the local board indicated support for the proposed engagement activities.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

23. Local government has obligations to Māori through legislation and the local board is committed to honoring te Tiriti o Waitangi/the Treaty of Waitangi.

24. Waitākere ki Tua provides opportunities to Mana Whenua and Māori to contribute to its decision-making in its dialogue with:

· mana whenua – currently represented by 19 tribal authorities in Auckland

· matāawaka – which includes individuals, whānau and organisations.

25. The local board is desirous of improved engagement with Māori so that the views and preferences of Māori are considered and factored into its decision making.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

26. The local board’s engagement activities are supported by the Engagement Advisor on a part time basis. The Engagement Advisor role is shared with the Henderson-Massey and Waitākere Ranges local boards.

27. Additional funding will be required depending on the number of engagement and consultation activities and associated events and activities. Most programmes or projects that require consultation have a small budget but there will be instances where additional funding is required. These will be sought from the local board as and when they arise.

28. The Whau Local Board has invested LDI funding towards the implementation of three engagement plans, Ethnic Peoples Plan , Pacific Peoples Plan and Waitākere ki Tua.

29. The Whau Local Board has also engaged into community partnerships with two local groups to ensure meaningful engagement is undertaken with diverse groups in the local area.

Ngā raru tūpono

Risks

30. Poor engagement can sometimes lead to decision making that doesn’t adequately respond to the needs of people. This strategy is aimed at increasing the quality of engagement so that the Whau Local Board can better understand the range of needs and aspirations of its community. However, establishing a good understanding of all relevant issues for every decision will not always be possible as it is also dependent on the community’s desire, willingness and ability to engage and input.

31. The local board could suffer a loss of reputation if the engagement strategy does not deliver improved meaningful engagement. Low engagement can risk the perception that the local board is out of touch with the community.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

32. The Engagement Advisor will develop an annual engagement calendar to be delivered alongside the Local Board Plan.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Whau Local Board Engagement Strategy	151

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Shoma Prasad - Engagement Advisor
Authoriser	Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Whau Local Board

23 February 2022

Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa - New Zealand Geographic Board: recording of unofficial place names as official

File No.: CP2022/00928

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To inform local boards about an opportunity to provide input to a project being undertaken by Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa New Zealand Geographic Board to record large numbers of unofficial place names as official.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa New Zealand Geographic Board is undertaking a project to record unofficial place names as official.

3. Around 30,000 place names throughout New Zealand have been shown on maps and charts for many years yet are not official. Of this there are 1,421 identified within the Auckland Region.

4. Where there is no other recorded name for a place, and where Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa considers it unlikely that the public would object, a fast-track process is enabled under legislation.

5. Of the 1,421 names proposed to be made official, 690 are non-Māori in origin, and 731 are te reo Māori.

6. Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa is consulting with councils and relevant mana whenua to ensure names are adopted correctly and remove place names from the fast-track process if there are any objections. The fast-track process does not require public consultation.

7. Within Auckland Council, local boards are best placed to provide local views. Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa is also consulting directly with mana whenua to ensure their views are represented.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Whau Local Board:

a) receive the report, including attachments which detail the unofficial place names in the local board area which are proposed to be made official.

b) provide feedback on any place names that, in their view, should not proceed under the fast-track process.

Horopaki

Context

8. Around 30,000 place names throughout New Zealand have been shown on maps and charts for many years yet are not official. Of this there are 1,421 identified within the Auckland Region.

9. Making place names official is important as it means there is one agreed and correct name for a place, which is especially important in an emergency. It is also an important way to formally recognise New Zealand’s unique culture and heritage.

The fast-track process

10. Section 24 of the New Zealand Geographic Board Act 2008, known as the fast-track process, authorises Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa to use its discretion to make existing recorded (unofficial) place names official when:

· there is no other recorded name for a place or feature on a map or chart, or in a database that Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa considers to be authoritative, and

· Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa considers it unlikely that the public would object.

11. A recorded place name is one that has been used in at least two publicly available publications or databases that Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa has agreed are authoritative.

12. A programme to implement this fast-track process is divided into the councils by region so that hundreds of existing recorded place names can be made official as part of one process.

13. The fast-track process does not require public consultation. However, Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa is consulting with councils and relevant mana whenua.

14. Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa has sought expert advice from a licensed te reo Māori translator about the correct standard conventions for writing the Māori place names, for example, spelling and macron use.

15. This project does not include applying formal boundary extents to any suburbs or localities – it is only about their names.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

16. Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa has given Auckland Council the opportunity to provide feedback on 1,421 unofficial places names throughout the Auckland Region to ensure that any issues or concerns are identified before the place names are officially adopted.

17. Within the shared governance structure of Auckland Council, local boards are best placed to represent local views.

18. The 1,421 place names are spread across all 21 of Auckland’s local boards, distributed as follows:

Table 1: Number of unofficial place names proposed to be adopted as official

Local Board	Number of place names
Albert-Eden Local Board	22
Aotea/Great Barrier Local Board	171
Devonport-Takapuna Local Board	24
Franklin Local Board	177
Henderson-Massey Local Board	17
Hibiscus and Bays Local Board	58
Howick Local Board	21
Kaipātiki Local Board	22
Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board	17
Manurewa Local Board	11
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board	20
Ōrākei Local Board	28
Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board	5
Papakura Local Board	10
Puketāpapa Local Board	14
Rodney Local Board	397
Upper Harbour Local Board	44
Waiheke Local Board	184
Waitākere Ranges Local Board	133
Waitematā Local Board	29
Whau Local Board	17

19. There is also an online map available showing the locations of each place name at https://www.arcgis.com/apps/mapviewer/index.html?webmap=ef47da1929664e3aba10233306a5449a

20. The list of proposed place name approvals has been divided into four types of change that Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa are proposing to make:

a) previously unofficial Māori place name to be adopted as is (376) (Attachment A)

b) previously unofficial Māori place name adopted with the addition of macrons (205) (Attachment B)

c) previously unofficial Māori place name where more information or clarification is sought regarding whether the name has been captured correctly (150) (Attachment C)

d) previously unofficial non-Māori place name to be adopted as is (690) (Attachment D).

21. The process for local boards to provide input is as follows:

· this report provides each local board with a list of recorded unofficial names that are proposed to be made official, organised into the four different types noted above

· each local board is invited to provide feedback on the following matters:

o any concerns, such as incorrect spelling, or other known names for the places or features

o any history/origin/meaning of these names that they wish to provide

o identification of any place names should not proceed under the fast-track process.

22. Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa will not proceed with making a place name official if it is likely to cause controversy within a community. If a local board wishes to have a place name removed from the fast-track process, it must make it clear in its feedback to Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa which name they object to, and why.

23. Any place names removed from the fast-track process will remain as an unofficial recorded place name and will not be discontinued or deleted.

24. More information on proposing a name change outside of the fast-track process can be found at https://www.linz.govt.nz/regulatory/place-names/propose-place-name

25. Each local board will receive a follow up memo at the conclusion of this project advising which names have been formally adopted within their local board area and which remain as an unofficial recorded place name.

26. Any stories that relate to local place names provided to Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa may be entered in the New Zealand Gazetteer.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

27. There are no climate implications from providing feedback on unofficial names proposed to be made official.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

28. Auckland Council’s GIS team is involved in this project to ensure that place names are recorded correctly with regards to feature type, and coordinates/position.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

29. The list of proposed place names includes a substantial number of Māori names, and all local board plans include objectives relating to delivering on commitments to Māori.

30. Any place name that the local board or mana whenua object to will be removed from the fast track process.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

31. Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa is consulting directly with mana whenua on the appropriateness of formalising place names that are currently in common use.

32. Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa has worked with a licensed Te Taura Whiri i te reo Māori translator to ensure that Māori place names currently in common use reflect correct spelling and macrons, and that their correct meanings are understood. Any place names mana whenua are not able to clarify will be removed from the fast track process.

33. Any proposed names that mana whenua object to will be removed from the fast-track process.

34. The Auckland Plan 2050 includes the outcome Māori Identity and Wellbeing: A thriving Māori identity is Auckland's point of difference in the world. It advances prosperity for Māori and benefits all Aucklanders.

35. The Māori Outcomes Performance Measurement Framework - Kia Ora Tāmaki Makaurau – includes a number of mahi objectives which are relevant to this work:

· the Council group supports te reo Māori to be seen, heard, spoken and learned throughout Tāmaki Makaurau

· the Council group reflects and promotes Māori culture and identity within the environment, and values mātauranga Māori

· the Council group fulfils its commitments and legal obligations to Māori derived from Te Tiriti o Waitangi and has the capability to deliver Māori outcomes.

36. Ensuring that unofficially recognised Māori place names currently in use become part of New Zealand’s official list of place names is an important step to delivering on these outcomes.

37. Likewise, ensuring that non-Māori names are not officially adopted where there is a te reo Māori name known to local iwi also delivers on these commitments.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

38. There are no financial implications from receiving this report.

39. There are no requirements to update signage, as all of the place names are commonly in use and would not create a name change.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

40. Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa will not proceed with making a place name official if it is likely to cause controversy within a community. Any place name that the local board or mana whenua object to will be removed from the fast-track process.

41. If any concerns arise in the future over the newly adopted official place names Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa may publish an amending notice in the NZ Gazette, or the public can make a proposal to Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa, depending on the nature of the change.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

42. Local boards are invited to provide formal feedback on the list of place names attached.

43. A follow-up memo will be shared with local boards indicating which place names were approved in each local board area as part of the fast-track process.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Previously unofficial Māori place name to be adopted as is	167
b ⇩	Previously unofficial Māori place name adopted with the addition of macrons	169
c ⇩	Previously unofficial Māori place name where more information or clarification is sought regarding whether the name has been captured correctly	171
d ⇩	Previously unofficial non-Māori place name to be adopted as is Name	173

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Kat Ashmead - Senior Advisor Operations and Policy

Authorisers

Louise Mason – General Manager Local Board Services

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Whau Local Board

23 February 2022

Local board views on plan change to amend Historic Heritage Schedule

File No.: CP2022/00079

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To invite local board’s views on a plan change by Auckland Council to amend the Auckland Unitary Plan Chapter L, Schedule 14 Historic Heritage Schedule, Statements and Maps.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Decision makers on a plan change to the Auckland Unitary Plan must consider local board’s views on the plan change if the relevant local boards choose to provide their views.

3. Each local board has a responsibility to communicate the interests and preferences of people in its area on Auckland Council policy documents. A local board can present local views and preferences when expressed by the whole local board.

4. Auckland Council’s plan change arises from the review of 91 historic heritage places in the Unitary Plan that are currently identified as Category A*. The plan change proposes to amend the category of these places and update other information about their heritage values, if appropriate.

5. This report is the mechanism for the local board to resolve and provide its views on the Council’s plan change. Staff do not provide recommendations on what view the local board should convey.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Whau Local Board:

a) provide its views on Council’s proposed change to the Auckland Unitary Plan to amend Schedule 14 Historic Heritage Schedule, Statement and Maps for 91 Category A* historic heritage places in Auckland.

b) appoint a local board member to speak to the local board views at a hearing on the plan change to enable Council’s amendments to 91 Category A* historic heritage places.

c) delegate authority to the chairperson of the Whau Local Board to make a replacement appointment in the event the local board member appointed in resolution b) is unable to attend the plan change hearing.

Horopaki

Context

6. Each local board is responsible for communicating the interests and preferences of people in its area regarding the content of Auckland Council’s strategies, policies, plans, and bylaws. Local boards provide their views on the content of these documents. Decision-makers must consider local boards’ views when deciding the content of these policy documents.

7. If the local board chooses to provide its views, the planner includes those views in the hearing report. Local board views are included in the analysis of the plan change, along with submissions.

8. If appointed by resolution, local board members may present the local board’s views at the hearing to commissioners, who decide on the plan change request.

9. This report provides an overview of the plan change.

10. The report does not recommend what the local board should convey. The planner must include any local board views in the evaluation of the plan change. The planner cannot advise the local board as to what its views should be, and then evaluate those views.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Plan change overview

11. The plan change amends the category status for 91 Category A* historic heritage places, following the re-evaluation of these places. The plan change also updates information in the Auckland Unitary Plan for the historic heritage places.

12. Historic heritage places in the Auckland Unitary Plan are identified in one of four categories: A, A*, B and historic heritage area:

· Category A: historic heritage places of outstanding significance well beyond their immediate environs

· Category A*: places identified in previous district plans which are yet to be evaluated and assessed for their significance

· Category B: places of considerable value to a locality or beyond

· Historic heritage areas: groupings of interrelated historic heritage places and features.

13. The Unitary Plan states that Category A* is an interim category until a comprehensive re-evaluation of these places is undertaken and their category status is addressed through a plan change process.

14. One historic heritage place in the plan change is within the Whau Local Board area:

· ID 00200 Gardner Bros & Parker /Ambrico downdraught kiln, Ambrico Historic Reserve, 8 Ambrico Place, New Lynn.

15. The plan change proposes that the kiln be a Category A.

16. The purpose of the plan change is to update the category status for 91 Category A* historic heritage places and to ensure the information in the Unitary Plan is accurate and reflects the historic heritage values of each place.

17. Outdated or incorrect information about Category A* historic heritage places in the Unitary Plan may result in the loss of significant historic heritage values or lead costs being unnecessarily imposed on landowners and the Council.

18. The notified plan change and section 32 document providing the rationale for the Council plan change are available on the Council’s website, following notification, at:

https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/plans-projects-policies-reports-bylaws/our-plans-strategies/unitary-plan/auckland-unitary-plan-modifications/proposed-plan-changes/Pages/default.aspx

19. Public submissions will be loaded onto the Council’s website once the notification period has closed.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

20. The historic heritage places in this plan change are already included in the Auckland Unitary Plan historic heritage schedule and subject to the provisions of the plan. The amendment of the category of these places and updating of information does not have any climate impact.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

21. Other parts of the Council group have provided input into the plan change, including Auckland Transport and Eke Panuku Development Auckland.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

22. This plan change affects four local boards: Devonport-Takapuna, Henderson-Massey, Kaipātiki and Whau.

23. The plan change includes one Category A* historic heritage place in Whau.

24. Factors the local board may wish to consider in formulating its view include:

· interests and preferences of people in the local board area

· well-being of communities within the local board area

· local board documents, such as the local board plan and local board agreement

· responsibilities and operation of the local board.

25. This report is the mechanism for obtaining formal local board views. The decision-maker will consider the local board views, if provided, when deciding on the plan change.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

26. If the local board chooses to provide its views on the plan change it includes the opportunity to comment on matters that may be of interest or importance to Māori, the well-being of Māori communities or Te Ao Māori (Māori worldview).

27. The Council has initiated consultation with all iwi authorities in the Auckland region.

28. The hearing report will include analysis of Part 2 of the Resource Management Act 1991 which requires that all persons exercising functions under that act shall take into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi/Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

29. The cost of the preparation of a plan change is provided for in the Plans and Places department budget.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

30. There is a risk that the local board will be unable to provide its views and preferences on the plan change if it doesn’t pass a resolution. This report provides:

· the mechanism for Whau Local Board to express its views and preferences

· the opportunity for a local board member to speak at a hearing.

31. If the local board chooses not to pass a resolution at this business meeting, these opportunities are forgone.

32. The power to provide local board views regarding the content of a plan change cannot be delegated to individual board member(s). This report enables the whole board to decide whether to provide its views and, if so, to determine what matters those views should include.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

33. The planner will include, and report on, any resolution of the local board in the hearing report. The local board member appointed to speak to the local board’s views will be informed of the hearing date and invited to the hearing for that purpose.

34. The planner will advise the local board of the decision on the plan change request by memorandum.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Emma Rush - Senior Advisor Special Projects

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Whau Local Board

23 February 2022

Auckland’s Water Strategy

File No.: CP2022/00934

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board feedback on the Auckland Water Strategy framework before it is recommended for adoption by the Environment and Climate Change Committee.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Water Strategy sets a vision for Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland’s waters and provides strategic direction for investment and action across the Auckland Council group.

3. The vision of the Water Strategy is: te mauri o te wai o Tāmaki Makaurau, the life-sustaining capacity of Auckland’s water, is protected and enhanced.

4. Local boards have previously provided feedback on the 2019 public discussion document (Our Water Future - Tō Tātou Wai Ahu Ake Nei), and this was considered in the development of the Auckland Water Strategy. Local boards’ feedback is now being sought on the draft Auckland Water Strategy framework.

5. The core content for the Auckland Water Strategy framework was endorsed at the Environment and Climate Change Committee on the 2nd of December 2021 (ECC/2021/44). The content is now being drafted into a final document and will be brought to the Environment and Climate Change Committee for consideration and adoption in March 2022.

6. Staff workshopped the framework with the Environment and Climate Change Committee and local board chairpersons throughout September-November 2021. The chairpersons received explanatory memos and supporting material ahead of workshops. Feedback during those workshops shaped the core content adopted at the Committee in December 2021.

7. Refer to Attachment A to the agenda report for the core content of the Auckland Water Strategy framework.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Whau Local Board:

a) provide feedback on the eight strategic shifts of the Auckland’s Water Strategy framework:

i) Te Tiriti Partnership

ii) Empowered Aucklanders

iii) Sustainable Allocation and Equitable Access

iv) Regenerative Water Infrastructure

v) Water Security

vi) Integrated Land use and Water Planning

vii) Restoring and Enhancing Water Ecosystems

viii) Pooling Knowledge.

Horopaki

Context

8. The Auckland Council group has a broad role in delivering water outcomes:

· Auckland Council provides storm water infrastructure and services; resource management regulation, consenting, monitoring, and compliance for effects on fresh water and coastal water; and research, reporting, policy, and strategy functions

· Watercare provides drinking water and wastewater infrastructure and services

· Auckland Transport influences land use and the stormwater network. The transport network is Auckland’s largest public realm asset and investment.

9. The Auckland Council (the Water Strategy) project began as a response to the 2017 Section 17A Value for Money review of three waters^{^[1]}delivery across the council group. The review recommended the Council produces a three waters strategy. The scope of the water strategy was subsequently expanded to incorporate other water related responsibilities, outcomes, and domains (e.g., natural waterbodies, groundwater, coastal waters, etc.).

10. A discussion document (Our Water Future - Tō Tātou Wai Ahu Ake Nei) was consulted on in 2019. The purpose of this document was to elicit community views on the future of Auckland’s waters and how the council should be planning for these in its water strategy.

11. This process established a high-level vision for Auckland’s waters, ‘te Mauri o te Wai o Tāmaki Makaurau - the life-sustaining capacity of Auckland’s water - is protected and enhanced’, and presented key values, issues and principles that were designed to inform strategy development. Actions and targets were not discussed. Strategic direction, actions and targets have been identified as part of the subsequent strategy development.

12. The Water Strategy sets a vision for Auckland’s waters and provides strategic direction for investment and action across the Council group. The Council has developed the strategy drawing on:

· relevant legislation and central government direction

· the Council’s strategies, policies and plans, and guidance including:

o The Auckland Plan 2050 - includes high-level approaches for how we can prioritise the health of water in Auckland by adopting a te ao Māori approach to protecting our waters; adapting to a changing water future; developing Aucklanders’ stewardship; restoring our damaged environments; protecting our significant water bodies; and using Auckland’s growth to achieve better water outcomes.

o Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri Auckland's Climate Action Plan - acknowledges that climate change will mean a changing water future and identifies integrated, adaptive planning approaches and water-sensitive design as key enablers of a climate-ready Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland.

· the Council’s Three Waters Value for Money (s17A) Review 2017

· the Our Water Future - Tō Tātou Wai Ahu Ake Nei discussion document framework and feedback from local boards, community and mana whenua from 2019

· individual iwi engagement and Tāmaki Makaurau Mana Whenua Forum engagement in 2021

· internal staff engagement during 2020-2021

· the Water Sensitive Cities Index and benchmarking in 2021.

13. The intent of the Water Strategy is that the Council fulfils its obligations to identify and plan for future challenges across its broad range of functions that affect water outcomes. These challenges are:

· protecting and enhancing the health of waterbodies and their ecosystems

· delivering three-waters services at the right time, in the right place, at the right scale, as the city grows

· having enough water for people now and in the future

· reducing flood and coastal inundation risk over time

· water affordability for Aucklanders

· improving how the Council works with its Treaty partners

· improving how the Council organises itself to achieve these outcomes.

14. The Water Strategy is intended to guide decision-making to 2050. Staff have therefore considered Tāmaki Makaurau’s broader context over the life of the strategy including:

· land use change, as driven by population growth in particular

· mitigating and adapting to climate change

· partnership approach with mana whenua

· growing iwi capacity and further settlements that will affect governance structures

· technological change.

15. Council has also considered the direction from central government to deliver management of freshwater, land use and development in catchments in an integrated and sustainable way to avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects, including cumulative effects^{^[2]}.

Central Government Three Waters Reforms

16. The Water Strategy has been developed during a period of significant uncertainty for the Council group. Central government has recently indicated that participation in the proposed Three Waters Reforms will be mandated in the planned enabling legislation. The reforms would move management of three waters assets to a new inter-regional entity. Economic regulation is also planned.

17. While the final form of the proposed structures is not known, it is important to understand that the proposed reform would not affect all areas of delivery for the Water Strategy. Council would retain its:

· core role as environmental regulator

· core role as regulatory planning authority

· core Treaty partnership role for local government

· core role to engage and be the voice for Auckland communities

· management of the council group’s own water consumption (towards consumption targets).

18. The Water Strategy provides strategic direction to the council group. Over the next few years, as the shape and impacts of proposed reform become clearer, the Council would use the strategy in appropriate ways to provide direction to any processes that arise. This strategy would become Council’s position on the aims and outcomes sought from any new entity.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

19. The purpose of this report is to provide local boards with an opportunity to feedback on the Auckland’s Water Strategy framework before it is finalised and recommended for adoption by the Environment and Climate Change Committee.

The Water Strategy Framework

20. The Water Strategy framework sets a vision for the future (previously adopted in 2019), a foundational partnership and eight key strategic shifts to guide change. The vision of the Water Strategy is: ‘te mauri o te wai o Tāmaki Makaurau, the life-sustaining capacity of Auckland’s water, is protected and enhanced’.

21. The framework articulates Auckland’s context, challenges, aims, and required actions. The framework is designed to make implementation steps clear for Council to track progress and so that communities and partners can hold Council accountable to progress over time.

22. The framework consists of:

· vision

· Treaty context

· challenges

· cross-cutting themes

· strategic shifts and associated aims and actions

· implementation.

23. The diagram below shows the Auckland’s Water Strategy Framework. Refer to Attachment A for the core content of the Auckland Water Strategy framework, including the aims and actions associated with each strategic shift.

Vision: te mauri o te wai o Tāmaki Makaurau, the life-sustaining capacity of Auckland’s water, is protected and enhanced

24. Auckland’s vision for the future is ‘te mauri o te wai o Tāmaki Makaurau, the life-sustaining capacity of Auckland’s waters, is protected and enhanced’.

25. The Water Strategy vision describes Tāmaki Makaurau’s desired long-term future and will guide Council decision-making over time towards that agreed goal. The vision outlines a future for Tāmaki Makaurau where the region’s waters are healthy, thriving, and treasured. This vision also describes a future where the deep connections between water, the environment and people are recognised and valued.

26. The mauri – the life sustaining capacity – of water is a fundamentally intuitive concept. It is something all Aucklanders can appreciate. There is a qualitative difference that is readily felt and sensed when walking alongside a healthy waterbody compared to a waterbody that has been channeled, polluted, or piped, for example.

27. The Our Water Future public discussion document received strong support for the vision. In the document, the vision was explained as:

· special to this place (Auckland)

· recognising the vital relationship between our water and our people

· recognising the role of mana whenua as kaitiaki within the region

· representing values that can unify us in our actions

· setting a long-term aspiration for the way we take care of our waters.

28. The Council set a long-term aspiration for Auckland when it adopted this vision in 2019. An aspiration for a future in which:

a) Aucklanders are able to swim in, and harvest from, our rivers, estuaries and harbours.

b) Life in and sustained by water is thriving.

c) Everyone has access to enough water of the appropriate quality to meet their needs.

29. Adopting this vision recognised that addressing Auckland’s water issues and challenges over time requires a bold vision and new ways of working together with Council’s Treaty partners and communities. The vision signals a greater recognition of a Māori worldview, of environmental limits, and interconnectedness of people and environment.

30. The vision is also consistent with Council’s obligations and aspirations, as well as central government direction. For example:

· the purpose of local government is to take a sustainable development approach to the broad role of promoting the four well-beings

· the purpose of the Resource Management Act is sustainable management of natural and physical resources in ways that enables the four well-beings

· Te Mauri o te Wai aligns with te Mana o te Wai in the National Policy Statement – Freshwater Management 2020 (NPS-FM), which provides for local expression

· the Auckland Plan directs Council to ‘Apply a Māori worldview to treasure and protect our natural environment (taonga tuku iho)’

· mauri is embedded in the Auckland Unitary Plan

· the Our Water Future public discussion document introduced the vision of te mauri o te wai o Tāmaki Makaurau and applying a Māori world view

· Te mauri o te wai is referenced in the Council’s 2021 Infrastructure Strategy.

Over-arching challenges

31. The intent of the Water Strategy is that the Council fulfils its obligations to identify and plan for future challenges across its broad range of functions that affect water outcomes. Tāmaki Makaurau faces several overarching challenges that inform the strategic direction set by the Water Strategy. These are:

· protecting and enhancing the health of waterbodies and their ecosystems

· delivering three-waters services at the right time, in the right place, at the right scale, as the city grows

· having enough water for people now and in the future

· reducing flood and coastal inundation risk over time

· affordability for Aucklanders

· improving how the Council works with its Treaty partners

· improving how the Council organises itself.

32. Attachment A provides a more detailed description of each over-arching challenge.

Treaty Context

33. Māori have enduring rights and interests related to water as a taonga and as indigenous peoples. These rights are affirmed under Te Tiriti o Waitangi/the Treaty of Waitangi and international law.

34. Auckland Council is committed to meeting its statutory Te Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi responsibilities. The council recognises these responsibilities are distinct from the Crown’s Treaty obligations and fall within a local government Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland context. Like the Council, mana whenua are long-term contributors to water outcomes.

35. This section within the framework acknowledges that the Treaty provides the context for partnership between Council and mana whenua for the protection, management, and enhancement of water.

Cross-cutting themes

36. In addition to over-arching challenges, there are cross-cutting themes that inform the Council’s strategic approach in the Water Strategy. The cross-cutting themes must be accounted for as the actions in the strategy are delivered.

Climate Change

37. Water and climate change are intrinsically linked. The twin challenges of mitigation and adaptation have been integrated within the strategy.

Equity

38. The Auckland Plan 2050 describes sharing prosperity with all Aucklanders as a key challenge now and for the future. Auckland has equitable access to water supply and sanitation, and performs well against international peers; however, there are areas for improvement that are captured in the strategy. Other equity issues such as flood protection and access to blue-green space for recreation are also considered within the strategy.

Strategic Shifts

39. The Water Strategy framework includes eight overarching strategic shifts. Each strategic shift is intended to represent long-term change in the Council’s approach towards a stated aim. To achieve this, each strategic shift has associated actions with indicative implementation timings identified. Shifts are designed so that the Council can add actions over time to the framework as progress is made.

40. The strategic shifts were arrived at by considering the changes that the Council must make to respond to the challenges and cross-cutting themes above, as well as responding to the water sensitive cities benchmarking undertaken. Actions were developed and grouped according to Council functions so that they might be more easily implemented by areas in the Council group.

Table one: Water Strategy Strategic Shifts and Associated Aims
Strategic shift	Aim
Te Tiriti Partnership The Council and mana whenua working together in agreed ways on agreed things.	The Council and mana whenua iwi are partners in the protection, management, and enhancement of water.
Empowering Aucklanders Working with Aucklanders for better water outcomes.	Aucklanders are empowered to shape decisions about and are prepared for our changing water future.
Regenerative Water Infrastructure Auckland’s water infrastructure is regenerative, resilient, low carbon, and increases the mauri of water. It’s able to be seen and understood by Aucklanders.	Regenerative infrastructure systems enhance the life-sustaining capacity of water (mauri).
Sustainable Allocation and Equitable Access Prioritising mauri when using water, to sustain the environment and people in the long term.	When the Council allocates water from the natural environment, water use is sustainable, and considers the health and wellbeing of ecosystems and people.
Water Security Water abundance and security for growing population through efficient use and diverse sources.	Auckland captures, uses, and recycles water efficiently so that everyone has access to enough water of the appropriate quality to meet their needs.
Integrated Land use and Water Planning Integrating land use and water planning at a regional, catchment and site scale.	Water and its life-sustaining capacity is a central principle in land management and planning decisions.
Restoring and Enhancing Water Ecosystems Catchment-based approaches to the health of water ecosystems.	Auckland has thriving and sustainable natural water ecosystems that support life, food gathering and recreation.
Pooling Knowledge Shared understanding enabling better decisions for our water future.	Auckland has the knowledge about water needed to make good quality, timely, and strategic decisions about water.

Implementation

41. Successfully delivering on the vision and integrated aims of the Water Strategy will require a coordinated and sustained approach to delivery across the council group.

42. The Water Strategy sets out a range of actions to be implemented over time for the Council group. The actions fall within two broad timeframes: near term (year one and years one – three) and medium term (years four – ten). Near term actions are prescriptive and specific. Medium term actions are more illustrative and require further development to implement successfully.

43. To implement the Water Strategy, the Council will need:

· to take a consistent, sustained approach to putting te mauri o te wai at the centre of Council group planning and investment decisions and action

· the skills and capacity to deliver on the water strategy, legislative requirements, and partnership relationships

· a strong culture of holistic planning, action, reporting and post-implementation review that feeds back into adaptive planning processes

· clarity of the roles and responsibilities across the Council group, with all teams directed and accountable for their role and function

· to give mana whenua clear sight of the Council’s work on water and enable participation/direction.

44. Changes required to give effect to the implementation of the strategy include:

· appoint Executive Lead Team Water Lead (complete)

· Water Strategy programme implementation coordinator

· coordinated workforce planning to fill gaps and changing needs

· update investment prioritisation criteria to reflect the Water Strategy

· Council reporting on te mauri o te wai

· integrated Asset Investment and Asset Management Planning, with an independent audit process.

Central government context

45. The Water Strategy considers and responds to current and expected direction from central government to:

· deliver management of freshwater, land use and development in catchments in an integrated and sustainable way

· a strengthening of the partnership between the Council and mana whenua in environmental management goal setting and decision-making frameworks

· the inclusion of Te Mana o Te Wai in the Auckland Unitary Plan

· a switch from an individual activity effects-based assessment (under the Resource Management Act 1991) to a more holistic limits-based approach, reflecting the need to better manage cumulative effects on water bodies

· an expectation of stronger enforcement of regulatory environmental obligations through policy effectiveness reporting (feedback loops between policy and actions) and improved compliance monitoring and enforcement reporting.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

46. Water and climate change are intrinsically linked. Climate change is a cross cutting theme of the Water Strategy (along with equity). The twin challenges of mitigation and adaptation were integrated into the strategy’s core content as it was developed.

47. Climate change will have wide-ranging implications for the issues raised in the Water Strategy, including:

· influencing demand for water use

· affecting water availability of a given water source over time

· increasing flood and coastal inundation hazard risk to life and property.

48. Improving our mitigation and resilience to these impacts via the approaches described in the Water Strategy aligns with Council’s existing goals and work programmes for climate action.

49. The physical impacts of climate change will have implications both for water management (including Māori water rights) in Auckland, and for related issues such as energy supply, social welfare, food security, and Māori land.

50. Water infrastructure has significant embedded carbon emissions. The regenerative water infrastructure strategic shift sets the council on a path to zero or low emissions water infrastructure.

51. The projected impacts of climate change on Auckland’s aquatic environments, and the associated risks, are detailed in two key report series: the Auckland Region Climate Change Projections and Impacts^{^[3]} and the Climate Change Risk in Auckland technical report series^{^[4]}.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

52. There is broad agreement across the Council group that better integration in water-related matters is needed, and that improvements in investment and decision-making processes are possible.

53. Staff have worked across the Council group to develop the Water Strategy’s core content through working groups, workshops, and review of material.

54. The strategic shifts and actions in the Water Strategy represent significant change in the way that the Council group approaches water-related challenges and opportunities in Auckland. In time, the way that staff work and the tools they have available will change. Greater and more coordinated oversight of resources that are used to deliver water outcomes is essential.

55. The Water Strategy embeds concepts like mauri and water-sensitive design into Council’s approach going forward. These actions require careful, considered partnership with mana whenua to create new frameworks that will guide decision-making. Coordinated education and upskilling programmes for staff will be needed to enable successful implementation.

56. Of note is the action to implement a Council group knowledge governance framework for water. This will mean review and redesign of processes governing the production of knowledge; how Council mobilises knowledge for different users and uses; and how Council promotes the use of knowledge.

57. The framework will help facilitate a culture change across the Council group, encouraging the sharing of knowledge across departments and organisations, and better connecting teams in the ownership of knowledge and insights.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

58. Local boards have a strong interest and role in improving water outcomes across Auckland and currently fund many local projects focused on restoration of local waterways.

59. Staff workshopped the Water Strategy framework, including each strategic shift and associated aims and actions, with the Environment and Climate Change Committee and local board chairpersons September to November 2021. The chairpersons received explanatory memos and supporting material ahead of workshops. Feedback during those workshops shaped the core content adopted at Committee in December 2021.

60. Previous local board feedback informed development of the Water Strategy. Staff held workshops with all local boards in late 2018 on the Our Water Future – Tō Tātou Wai Ahu Ake Nei discussion document and sought their feedback through formal business meetings. Local board resolutions were provided to the Environment and Community Committee in December 2018 (ENV/2018/168) when the discussion document was approved for public consultation.

61. During public engagement, local boards hosted many of the Have Your Say consultation events and helped to ensure local views were fed into the feedback. This feedback has been an input to the development of the strategy. There was broad support for the vision, values, issues, processes and principles presented in the discussion document. The Environment and Climate Change Committee adopted the framework as the basis for developing the Auckland Water Strategy.

62. Key themes from local board engagement are presented below. Staff have designed the strategic shifts and actions to address these key themes – these are noted in italics:

i) A desire to improve engagement with local communities and deliver targeted education programmes – Empowering Aucklanders strategic shift.

ii) Recognising water is a limited resource, that access to water is a human right and supply must be allocated fairly – Water Security and Sustainable Allocation and Equitable Access strategic shifts.

A need to improve the diminishing water quality of local water bodies including urban streams, gulfs and harbours – Restoring and Enhancing water ecosystems strategic shift.

iii) A need to carefully manage urban development and take up opportunities to embed water-sensitive design – Integrated Land use and Water Planning strategic shift.

iv) A need for proactive monitoring and enforcement, supported by a robust and transparent evidence base – Pooling Knowledge strategic shift.

63. Feedback on several water-related topics that were not part of the discussion document’s scope was also received from local boards. This included water infrastructure, the importance of future proofing our assets, incorporating sustainable options such as greywater reuse and roof collection, and the management of contaminant run-off and stormwater discharges.

64. Staff considered these important issues and they have been incorporated into the strategy – see Regenerative Water Infrastructure strategic shift.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

65. Every iwi and hapū has associations with particular waterbodies^{^[5]} that are reflected in their whakapapa, waiata, and whaikōrero tuku iho (stories of the past). Protecting the health and mauri of our freshwater ecosystems is fundamental to providing for the food, materials, customary practices, te reo Māori, and overall well-being of iwi and hapū.

66. Engagement with Māori that has informed this work includes:

· Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum Guidance to the Water Strategy 2019

· submissions to the Our Water Future Public Discussion Document 2019

· Te Pou Taiao engagement throughout 2021

· individual engagement with iwi partners in 2021 including face-to-face hui.

67. Refer to Our Water Future: Report on Māori response to Auckland Council Water Strategy consultation for further information on the submissions of Māori who responded to public discussion document consultation. Key themes from Māori engagement are presented below. Staff have designed the strategic shifts and actions to address these key themes – these are noted in italics:

i) Māori are committed to the maintenance of the mauri of water and they want to be a part of the conversation – Te Tiriti Partnership and Empowering Aucklanders strategic shifts.

ii) Awareness/Education (concerns for peoples’ priorities, climate change has arrived – inevitable there will be changing water patterns) – Empowering Aucklanders strategic shift.

iii) Water sovereignty (should be allowed water tanks on our properties) – Water Security strategic shift.

iv) Reciprocity (look after our environment it will continue to look after us) – Restore and Enhance Water Ecosystems, Sustainable Allocation and Equitable Access and Regenerative Water Infrastructure strategic shifts.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

68. Implementing the proposed Water Strategy actions will have budgetary implications in time. Cost scenarios have not been undertaken for the actions as this is work that is required as the group works through the implementation of the strategy. Most actions do not commit the Council group to a singular solution, but rather to investigate options and their associated cost within the action, for subsequent decision making. From a cost perspective it is expected that the actions associated with each strategic shift will be possible through:

· providing clear strategic direction to improve current processes (no new spend)

· redirecting current spend to higher priority activity aligned to strategic direction

· new spend, prioritised through council processes (i.e., Annual Budget and Long-term Plan/10-year Budget).

69. Over the next 30 years, the Council expects to spend approximately $85 billion on infrastructure for three waters alone (capital and operational expenditure). There is considerable scope to align that spend to the vision of the water strategy.

70. Where actions do require additional spend, such spend must be considered through council’s Annual Plan and Long-term Plan/10-year Budget processes. Additional spend would not be limited to three waters infrastructure and services, and would include all Council group functions related to water outcomes.

71. It is also noted that central government’s messaging for its Three Waters Reforms programme suggests the proposed new water entities may have access to greater lending facilities. This would presumably impact delivery of three waters infrastructure and services in Auckland, some of which would relate to the proposed Water Strategy’s strategic shifts and associated actions.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

72. The recommendation requesting local board views does not present a risk.

73. The risks and mitigations listed below relate to the Environment and Climate Change Committee’s decision to adopt the Water Strategy:

Risk

Assessment

Mitigation/Control measures

Insufficient or inconsistent implementation of the strategy

Medium risk

Poor coordination is a key driver for the strategy and implementation must respond to this reality.

The Strategy needs buy-in across the Council leadership and consistent political leadership to ensure coherent implementation.

Staff with responsibilities for shifts and actions have been engaged in the development of the strategy.

A Water Strategy programme implementation coordinator will provide support to implementation.

Central government reform: if established, a new three waters entity disregards strategic intent of Water Strategy

High risk

The Council should use the Water Strategy to assist in articulating the long-term aims for water in Auckland. The Strategy may also be useful to guide discussions during any transition process.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

74. The Water Strategy final document and will be brought to Environment and Climate Change Committee for consideration and adoption in March 2022.

75. A high-level implementation plan for the Water Strategy, with action-owners, will accompany the final document.

76. The actions related to each strategic shift may require further refinement and the core content will require editing appropriate for an external-facing document. A workshop of the Environment and Climate Change Committee on actions and the draft strategy will be scheduled prior to the Water Strategy document being presented to Environment and Climate Change Committee for adoption. Local board chairpersons will be invited to that workshop.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Water Strategy Core Content	193

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Toby Shephard - Strategist

Authorisers

Louise Mason – General Manager Local Board Services

Jacques Victor – General Manager Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Whau Local Board

23 February 2022

Public feedback on proposal to make a Freedom Camping in Vehicles Bylaw 2022

File No.: CP2022/00277

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposed new Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture ā-Rohe Noho Puni Wātea ā-Waka 2022 / Auckland Council Freedom Camping in Vehicles Bylaw 2022, before a final decision is made.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. To enable the local board to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, staff have summarised the feedback.

3. The proposal helps to help protect sensitive areas, public health and safety and access to public places from harms caused by freedom camping in vehicles by:

· prohibiting or restricting freedom camping in certain areas of Auckland

· providing for freedom camping to be temporarily prohibited or restricted in a specific area

· providing for temporary changes to restrictions that apply in a specific area.

4. Council received feedback from 1,617 individuals and organisations to the Have Your Say consultation and from 1,914 individuals to a research survey. This included 17 Have Your Say feedback and 103 research survey respondents from the Local Board area.

5. All feedback is summarised into the following topics:

Topic	Description
Proposal 1	Include general rules in areas we manage where freedom camping is not otherwise prohibited or restricted.
Proposal 2	Set four general rules, which would require freedom campers staying in these areas to:
Proposal 2.1	Use a certified self-contained vehicle
Proposal 2.2	Stay a maximum of two nights in the same road or off-road parking area
Proposal 2.3	Depart by 9am on the third day
Proposal 2.4	Not return to the same road or off-road parking area within two weeks.
Proposal 3	Schedule 45 prohibited areas, where no freedom camping would be allowed.
Proposal 4	Schedule 22 restricted areas, where freedom camping would be allowed subject to conditions.
Other	Suggestions for additional prohibited or restricted areas.
Themes	Summary of key comment themes.

6. Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, and if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel. Taking this approach will assist the Panel and Governing Body to decide whether to adopt, amend or reject the proposal.

7. There is a reputational risk that Have Your Say feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and organisations and does not reflect the views of the whole community, particularly as Auckland was under COVID-19 restrictions during consultation. This risk is mitigated by the research survey of a representative sample of Aucklanders and by providing a summary of all public feedback.

8. The Bylaw Panel will consider all local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body on 29 April and 6 May 2022. The Governing Body will make a final decision in June 2022.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Whau Local Board:

a) tūtohi / receive public feedback on the proposal to make a new Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture ā-Rohe Noho Puni Wātea ā-Waka 2022 / Auckland Council Freedom Camping in Vehicles Bylaw 2022 in this agenda report.

b) whakarato / provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal in recommendation (a) to assist the Bylaw Panel in its deliberations.

c) whakatuu / appoint one or more local board members to present the views in (b) to the Bylaw Panel on 22 April 2022.

d) tuku mana / delegate authority to the local board Chair to appoint replacement(s) to the persons in (c) should an appointed member be unable to present to the Bylaw Panel.

Horopaki

Context

Bylaw regulates freedom camping in public places

9. Auckland’s current Legacy Freedom Camping Bylaw 2015 is a consolidation of pre-2010 legacy bylaw provisions developed before the Freedom Camping Act 2011 was passed.

10. A new bylaw must be made that aligns with the national legislation before the current bylaw expires on 29 October 2022 to avoid a regulatory gap.

Council proposed a new bylaw for public feedback

11. The proposal arose from a statutory review of the Freedom Camping Bylaw 2015 in August 2017 which determined that a bylaw made under the Freedom Camping Act 2011 is an appropriate way to manage freedom camping in Auckland.

12. In March 2021 the Governing Body gave staff new direction to inform development of a Freedom Camping in Vehicles Bylaw for Auckland. This decision followed consideration of possible elements to replace an earlier proposal developed in 2018, which was set aside by the Governing Body in August 2019.

13. On 23 September 2021, the Governing Body adopted for public consultation a proposal to make a new Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture ā-Rohe Noho Puni Wātea ā-Waka 2022 / Auckland Council Freedom Camping in Vehicles Bylaw 2022 (GB/2021/112).

14. The proposal helps to help protect sensitive areas, public health and safety and access to public places from harms caused by freedom camping, by:

· excluding land held under the Reserves Act 1977 from scope (council would maintain the current default prohibition on camping on reserves under the Reserves Act 1977, although local boards can choose to allow camping on some reserves by following processes set out in that Act)

· managing freedom camping only on land held under the Local Government Act 2002

· seeking to prevent freedom camping impacts in sensitive areas, and protecting public health and safety and managing access in all areas, by:

o scheduling 45 prohibited areas, where no freedom camping is allowed

o scheduling 22 restricted areas, where freedom camping is allowed subject to site-specific restrictions

o including general rules to manage freedom camping impacts in all other areas (campers must use certified self-contained vehicles, stay a maximum of two nights, depart by 9am and not return to the same area within two weeks).

15. The proposal was publicly notified for feedback from 26 October until 5 December 2021.

16. Council received feedback from 1,571 individuals and 46 organisations (1,617 in total) provided via the Have Your Say webpage, by email and at virtual events.

17. Feedback was also received from 1,914 respondents to an external research survey of a representative sample of Aucklanders.

The local board has an opportunity to provide views on public feedback

18. The local board now has an opportunity to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal before a final decision is made.

19. Local board views must be provided by resolution to the Bylaw Panel. The local board can also choose to present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 22 April 2022.

20. The nature of the local board views are at the discretion of the local board but must remain within the scope of the proposal and public feedback. For example, the local board could:

· indicate support for matters raised in public feedback by people from the local board area

· recommend how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Feedback from people in the local board area compared to Auckland-wide feedback

21. A total of 17 Have your Say respondents (HYS) and 103 research survey respondents (RS) from the local board area provided feedback to the proposal:

· for Proposal One there was majority support, similar to the level of support in overall feedback

· for Proposal Two there was majority support for two general rules and split support for the maximum stay and departure time rules.

· for Proposal Four there was majority opposition for the proposed restricted areas in the local board area (there are no proposed prohibited areas in the local board area in Proposal Three).

General rule feedback (Proposals 1 and 2)

Proposal	Local board feedback	Auckland-wide feedback
1: Include general rules in areas we manage where freedom camping is not otherwise prohibited or restricted	82 per cent HYS support 92 per cent RS support	55 per cent HYS support 90 per cent RS support
2: Set four general rules, which would require freedom campers staying in these areas to:
2.1: Use a certified self-contained vehicle	58 per cent HYS support · 17 per cent preferred certified self-contained vehicles ‘unless staying in a serviced area’ 77 per cent RS support	68 per cent HYS support · 13 per cent preferred certified self-contained vehicles ‘unless staying in a serviced area’ 76 per cent RS support
2.2: Stay a maximum of two nights in the same road or off-road parking area	30 per cent support · 30 per cent preferred 1 night 71 per cent RS support	39 per cent support · 32 per cent preferred 1 night 70 per cent RS support
2.3: Depart by 9am on the third day	29 per cent support · 43 per cent preferred 10am · 17 per cent preferred 8am 57 per cent RS support	28 per cent support · 24 per cent preferred 10am · 23 per cent preferred 8am 52 per cent RS support
2.4: Not return to the same road or off-road parking area within two weeks	75 per cent support · 25 per cent preferred no no-return period rule 57 per cent RS support	40 per cent support · 28 per cent preferred 4 weeks 55 per cent RS support

Proposal

Local board feedback

Auckland-wide feedback

1: Include general rules in areas we manage where freedom camping is not otherwise prohibited or restricted

82 per cent HYS support

92 per cent RS support

55 per cent HYS support

90 per cent RS support

2: Set four general rules, which would require freedom campers staying in these areas to:

2.1: Use a certified self-contained vehicle

58 per cent HYS support

· 17 per cent preferred certified self-contained vehicles ‘unless staying in a serviced area’

77 per cent RS support

68 per cent HYS support

· 13 per cent preferred certified self-contained vehicles ‘unless staying in a serviced area’

76 per cent RS support

2.2: Stay a maximum of two nights in the same road or off-road parking area

30 per cent support

· 30 per cent preferred 1 night

71 per cent RS support

39 per cent support

· 32 per cent preferred 1 night

70 per cent RS support

2.3: Depart by 9am on the third day

29 per cent support

· 43 per cent preferred 10am

· 17 per cent preferred 8am

57 per cent RS support

28 per cent support

· 24 per cent preferred 10am

· 23 per cent preferred 8am

52 per cent RS support

2.4: Not return to the same road or off-road parking area within two weeks

75 per cent support

· 25 per cent preferred no no-return period rule

57 per cent RS support

40 per cent support

· 28 per cent preferred 4 weeks

55 per cent RS support

Site-specific feedback (Proposals 3 and 4)

Proposal

Local board feedback (n=4)^{^[6]}

Auckland-wide feedback

3: Schedule 45 prohibited areas, where no freedom camping would be allowed

· Note: there are no proposed prohibited areas in the Whau Local Board area

· Four people commented on prohibited areas outside your local board area.

Majority support for prohibition at 11 areas^{^[7]}

Majority opposition for prohibition at 34 areas

4: Schedule 22 restricted areas, where freedom camping would be allowed subject to conditions.

· Valonia Reserve: 0 support, 1 oppose (prefers that freedom camping is allowed subject to the general rules)

· Wingate Reserve: 0 support, 1 oppose (prefers that freedom camping is allowed subject to the general rules).

Majority support for restrictions at one area^{^[8]}

Majority opposition for restrictions at 21 areas

22. Key themes from local feedback are consistent with regional feedback. For example, that:

· respondents are concerned with enforcement of the bylaw and other implementation matters

· council should invest more in camper facilities.

23. The proposal can be viewed in the link. A summary of all public feedback is in Attachment A and a copy of all local board Have Your Say feedback is in Attachment B.

Staff recommend the local board provide its views on public feedback

24. Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback by resolution, and if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 22 April 2022.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

25. Staff note that this is a regulatory process to manage existing activities enabled by central government policy. It is not causing these activities to occur or affecting the likelihood that they will occur. The decision sought in this report therefore has no specific climate impact.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

26. The proposal impacts the operations of several council departments and Council-controlled organisations, including Licensing and Regulatory Compliance, Parks, Sport and Recreation, and Auckland Transport.

27. The Licensing and Regulatory Compliance unit are aware of the impacts of the proposal and their primary role in implementing and managing compliance with the Bylaw.

28. Council’s 86 park rangers help to manage compliance with Council Bylaws, the Reserves Act 1977 and the Litter Act 1974 by carrying out education and monitoring on parks and reserves. However, rangers are not currently being warranted or renewing warrants and Licensing and Regulatory Compliance will continue to carry out any enforcement required.

Enhanced service levels for Bylaw compliance activities are not currently budgeted

29. Concern about council’s ability to effectively implement the Bylaw and manage compliance within existing resources was a key theme of public and local board feedback in 2019. This issue remains in 2021 with most local boards (16 out of 21) raising it in response to the draft proposal and is a key theme from Have Your Say consultation on the proposal.

30. In March 2021 the Governing Body requested advice about costed options for increasing the service levels for compliance associated with this Bylaw. Costings for these options were provided to the Governing Body in September 2021, for consideration during future Long-term Plan and Annual Plan cycles. The options included costings for:

· enhancement of council’s information technology systems, to enable the implementation of the new infringement notice regime

· use of contracted security services, to increase responsiveness to complaints (similar to the current arrangements for Noise Control), or for additional proactive monitoring at seasonal ‘hotspots’

· purchase of mobile printers, to enable infringement notices to be affixed to vehicles in breach of the Bylaw at the time of the offence

· camera surveillance technology to enable remote monitoring of known or emerging hotspots, for evidence-gathering purposes and/or to support real-time enforcement.

31. Local boards were advised in August 2021 that they can request further advice from Licensing and Regulatory Compliance if they wish to consider allocating local budget for enhanced local compliance activities.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

32. The proposed Bylaw impacts on local boards’ governance role as it affects decision making over local assets, particularly parks and other Council-controlled public places. There is also high community interest in freedom camping regulation in many local board areas.

33. Local boards provided formal feedback on the 2018 draft proposal to the Bylaw Panel in 2019, following on from their early feedback given during engagement in 2017, and site-specific feedback provided in 2018. This feedback supported the Governing Body decision to set aside the 2018 proposal to which this new proposal responds.

34. Three local board representatives participated in a joint political working group on 21 May 2021 to provide views on options for including general rules in the Bylaw. The working group unanimously supported the inclusion of general rules in the Bylaw, and five out of six members supported the recommended settings included in the proposal. A summary of the working group’s views was reported to the Governing Body on 27 May 2021.

35. In August 2021 staff sought local board views on a draft proposal for public consultation. The draft proposal was supported by 11 local boards with eight noting concerns or requesting changes, partly supported by six local boards noting concerns or requesting changes, and not supported by three local boards.

36. A summary of local board views of the proposal can be viewed in the link to the 23 September 2021 Governing Body agenda, page 257 (Attachment B to Item 13).

37. This report provides an opportunity to give local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, before a final decision is made.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

38. The Bylaw has relevance to Māori as kaitiaki of Papatūānuku. The proposal supports two key directions in the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau:

· wairuatanga (promoting distinctive identity), in relation to valuing and protecting Māori heritage and Taonga Māori

· kaitiakitanga (ensuring sustainable futures), in relation to environmental protection.

39. The proposal also supports the Board’s Schedule of Issues of Significance by ensuring that sites of significance to Māori are identified and protected from freedom camping harms.

40. Mana whenua and mataawaka were invited to provide feedback during the development of the 2018 proposal via dedicated hui and again through the public consultation process.

41. Feedback received on specific prohibited and restricted areas identified in the 2018 proposal was incorporated into the deliberations. This included the identification of sites of significance to Māori, such as wahi tapu areas.

42. General matters raised by Māori during past engagement included the need to ensure:

· the ability to add further sites of significance to the bylaw as these are designated

· provision for temporary bans on freedom camping, including in areas under a rahui

· a compassionate approach to people experiencing homelessness

· provision of sufficient dump stations to avoid environmental pollution

· clear communication of the rules in the bylaw and at freedom camping sites.

43. The proposal addresses these matters by proposing to prohibit freedom camping at sites of significance to Māori (such as Maraetai Foreshore and Onetangi Cemetery), provision in the Bylaw for temporary bans, and confirming council’s commitment to a compassionate enforcement approach to people experiencing homelessness.

44. Mana whenua and mataawaka were notified of the proposal and given the opportunity to provide any additional feedback through face-to-face meetings, in writing, online and in-person. No additional feedback was received from iwi and mataawaka organisations.

45. Eight per cent of people who provided feedback via the Have Your Say consultation and eight percent of research survey respondents identified as Māori.

46. The Have Your Say consultation identified that Māori had similar support for the use of general rules in principle, have similar mixed support on the four specific general rules and similar opposition to the specific restricted and prohibited sites compared to non-Māori.

47. The research survey identified that Māori had similar support for general rules and feel more strongly about the benefits and problems of freedom camping compared to non-Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

48. There are no financial implications arising from decisions sought in this report. Costs associated with the special consultative procedure and Bylaw implementation will be met within existing budgets.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

49. The following risks have been identified:

If...	Then...	Mitigation
The feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and organisations.	The feedback may not reflect the views of the whole community.	This risk is mitigated by the research survey of a representative sample of Aucklanders and by providing a summary of all public feedback.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

50. On 22 April 2022 local boards may present their formal views to the Bylaw Panel. On 29 April and 6 May 2022, the Bylaw Panel will consider all formal local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body. The Governing Body will make a final decision in June 2021.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Summary of all public feedback to proposed new Freedom Camping Bylaw	233
b ⇩	Public feedback from people in the Whau Local Board area	429

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Bayllee Vyle - Policy Advisor

Rebekah Forman - Principal Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Paul Wilson - Senior Policy Manager

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Whau Local Board

23 February 2022

PDF Creator

Whau Local Board

23 February 2022

Public feedback on proposal to make a new Signs Bylaw 2022

File No.: CP2022/00951

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to a proposed new Auckland Council and Auckland Transport Ture ā-Rohe mo nga Tohu 2022 / Signs Bylaw 2022 and associated controls, before a final decision is made.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. To enable the local board to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to a proposal to make a new Signs Bylaw and associated controls, staff have prepared a summary of feedback.

3. The proposal seeks to better manage the problems signs can cause in relation to nuisance, safety, misuse of public places, the Auckland transport system and environment.

4. Council received responses from 106 people and organisations at the close of feedback on 27 October 2021. All feedback is summarised by the following topics:

· Proposal 1: Banners	· Proposal 10: Verandah signs
· Proposal 2A: Election signs (9-week display)	· Proposal 11A: Wall-mounted signs (Heavy Industry Zones)
· Proposal 2B: Election signs (directed at council-controlled parks, reserves, Open Space Zones)	· Proposal 11B: Wall-mounted signs
· Proposal 2C: Election signs	· Proposal 12: Window signs
· Proposal 3A: Event signs (temporary sales)	· Proposal 13A: Major Recreational Facility Zones
· Proposal 3B: Event signs (election sign sites and not-for-profits)	· Proposal 13B: Open Space Zones
· Proposal 3C: Event signs	· Proposal 13C: Commercial sexual services
· Proposal 4: Free-standing signs	· Proposal 14A: General (safety and traffic)
· Proposal 5A: Portable signs (City Centre Zone)	· Proposal 14B: General (tops of buildings)
· Proposal 5B: Portable signs	· Proposal 14C: General (illuminated signs)
· Proposal 6: Posters	· Proposal 14D: General (business that cease trading)
· Proposal 7A: Real estate signs (Heavy Industry Zones)	· Proposal 15: Controls and approvals
· Proposal 7B: Real estate signs	· Proposal 16: Enforcement powers and penalties, and savings
· Proposal 8: Stencil signs	· Other feedback
· Proposal 9: Vehicle signs

5. Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, and if it wishes, present those views to the Panel. Taking this approach will assist the Panel in making recommendations to the Governing Body and Board of Auckland Transport about whether to adopt the proposal.

6. There is a reputational risk that the feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and does not reflect the views of the whole community. This report mitigates this risk by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

7. The Bylaw Panel will consider all local board views and public feedback on the proposal on 28 March 2022, and deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body in April 2022. The Governing Body and the Board of Auckland Transport will make final decisions in April and May 2022 respectively.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Whau Local Board:

a) tūtohi / receive the public feedback on the proposal to make a new Auckland Council and Auckland Transport Ture ā-Rohe mo nga Tohu 2022 / Signs Bylaw 2022 and associated controls in this agenda report.

b) whakarato / provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal in recommendation (a) to assist the Bylaw Panel in its deliberations.

c) whakatuu / appoint one or more local board members to present the views in b) to the Bylaw Panel on 28 March 2022.

d) tuku mana / delegate authority to the local board chair to appoint replacement(s) to the persons in c) should an appointed member be unable to present to the Bylaw Panel.

Horopaki

Context

Two bylaws currently regulate most signs in Auckland

8. Two bylaws currently regulate most signs in Auckland:

· The Auckland Council and Auckland Transport Ture ā-Rohe mo nga Tohu 2015 / Signage Bylaw 2015 and associated controls

· Te Ture ā-Rohe mo nga Tohu Pānui Pōti a Auckland Transport 2013 / the Auckland Transport Election Signs Bylaw 2013.

9. The Signage Bylaw minimises risks to public safety, prevents nuisance and misuse of council controlled public places, and protects the environment from negative sign impacts.

10. The Election Signs Bylaw addresses public safety and amenity concerns from the negative impacts of election signs.

11. The rules are enforced by Auckland Council’s Licensing and Regulatory Compliance unit using a graduated compliance model (information, education and enforcement).

12. The two bylaws and controls are part of a wider regulatory framework that includes the:

· Auckland Unitary Plan Operative in part for billboards and comprehensive development signage

· Auckland Council District Plan – Hauraki Gulf Islands Section for signs on, in or over a scheduled item or its scheduled site on the Hauraki Gulf islands

· Electoral Act 1993, Local Electoral Act 2001 and Electoral (Advertisements of a Specified Kind) Regulations 2005 for elections

· Land Transport Rule: Traffic Control Devices and New Zealand Transport Agency (Signs on State Highways) Bylaw 2010 for transport-related purposes

· New Zealand Advertising Standards Authority codes and the Human Rights Act 1993 for the content of signs

· Auckland Council Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw 2013 and Trading and Events in Public Places Bylaw 2015 for signs and structures in public places such as for events.

13. The Signage Bylaw 2015 will expire on 28 May 2022 and council must make a new bylaw before that date to avoid a regulatory gap.

Council and Auckland Transport proposed a new bylaw for public feedback

14. On 26 August 2021, the Governing Body and Board of Auckland Transport adopted a proposal to make a new Auckland Council and Auckland Transport Ture ā-Rohe mo nga Tohu 2022 / Signs Bylaw 2022 and associated controls for public consultation (GB/2021/103; Board of Auckland Transport decision 26 August 2021, Item 10).

15. The proposal arose from a statutory review of the Signage Bylaw 2015 (see figure below).

Calendar

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

16. The proposal seeks to better manage the problems signs can cause in relation to nuisance, safety, misuse of public places, the Auckland transport system and environment. Major proposals in comparison to the current bylaws are:

· to make a new bylaw and associated controls that combines and revokes the current Signage Bylaw 2015 and Election Signs Bylaw 2013

· in relation to election signs, to:

o enable election signs on places not otherwise allowed up to nine weeks prior to an election

o clarify that election signs on private property must not be primarily directed at a park, reserve, or Open Space Zone

o remove the ability to display election signs related to Entrust

· in relation to event signs:

o allowing event signs on the same roadside sites as election signs

o clarifying that community event signs on community-related sites may only be displayed if a not-for-profit provides the event

o enabling signs for temporary sales

· increase the current portable sign prohibited area to cover the entire City Centre Zone

· increase the maximum flat wall-mounted sign area in the Heavy Industry Zone to 6m²

· add rules about signs that advertise the temporary sale of goods

· retain the intent of the current bylaws (unless stated) while increasing certainty and reflecting current practice. For example, to clarify that:

o signs on boundary fences with an Open Space Zone require council approval

o the placement of directional real estate signs applies to the ‘three nearest intersections’

o changeable messages relate to transitions between static images

o LED signs must comply with the relevant luminance standards

o there is a limit of one commercial sexual services sign per premises

· using a bylaw structure, format and wording more aligned to the Auckland Unitary Plan and current council drafting standards.

17. The proposal was publicly notified for feedback from 22 September until 27 October 2021. Council received feedback from 76 people and 30 organisations (106 in total).

The local board has an opportunity to provide views on public feedback

18. The local board now has an opportunity to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal before a final decision is made.

19. Local board views must be provided by resolution to the Bylaw Panel. The local board can also choose to present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 28 March 2022.

20. The nature of the local board views are at the discretion of the local board but must remain within the scope of the proposal and public feedback. For example, the local board could:

· indicate support for matters raised in public feedback by people from the local board area

· recommend how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

21. A total of six people from the local board area provided feedback to the proposal.

22. There was majority support for Proposals 1, 2B, 2C, 5A, 6, 7A, 13C, 14A, 14B, 14C and 14D, split support (50 per cent) for Proposals 3A, 3B, 3C, 4, 11A and 13B and majority opposition for Proposals 2A, 5B, 7B, 9, 12, 15 and 16. Opinions about the remaining proposals were mixed, with no clear majority of respondents in support or opposition.

23. In contrast, there was majority support for all proposals (except Proposals 9 and 13A) from all people who provided feedback Auckland-wide.

Support of proposal in the local board area

Topic	Local board feedback		Auckland-wide feedback
Topic	Support	Opposition	Support	Opposition
P1: Banners	67 per cent	33 per cent	73 per cent	22 per cent
P2A: Election signs (9-week display)	40 per cent	60 per cent	53 per cent	36 per cent
P2B: Election signs (directed at council-controlled parks or reserves, or at an Open Space Zone)	80 per cent	20 per cent	63 per cent	35 per cent
P2C: Election signs	80 per cent	20 per cent	67 per cent	21 per cent
P3A: Event signs (temporary sales)	50 per cent	50 per cent	54 per cent	34 per cent
P3B: Event signs (election sign sites and not-for-profits)	50 per cent	50 per cent	59 per cent	27 per cent
P3C: Event signs	50 per cent	50 per cent	78 per cent	7 per cent
P4: Free-standing signs	50 per cent	50 per cent	66 per cent	14 per cent
P5A: Portable signs (City Centre Zone)	67 per cent	33 per cent	65 per cent	20 per cent
P5B: Portable signs	33 per cent	67 per cent	74 per cent	8 per cent
P6: Posters	67 per cent	33 per cent	76 per cent	16 per cent
P7A: Real estate signs (Heavy Industry Zones)	67 per cent	33 per cent	56 per cent	32 per cent
P7B: Real estate signs	33 per cent	67 per cent	62 per cent	24 per cent
P8: Stencil signs	0 per cent	50 per cent	71 per cent	13 per cent
P9: Vehicle signs	0 per cent	100 per cent	40 per cent	43 per cent
P10: Verandah signs	0 per cent	50 per cent	54 per cent	18 per cent
P11A: Wall-mounted signs (Heavy Industry Zones)	50 per cent	50 per cent	60 per cent	24 per cent
P11B: Wall-mounted signs	33 per cent	33 per cent	59 per cent	24 per cent
P12: Window signs	0 per cent	100 per cent	69 per cent	28 per cent
P13A: Major Recreational Facility Zones	33 per cent	33 per cent	48 per cent	10 per cent
P13B: Open Space Zones	50 per cent	50 per cent	59 per cent	21 per cent
P13C: Commercial sexual services	67 per cent	33 per cent	73 per cent	20 per cent
P14A: General (safety and traffic)	67 per cent	33 per cent	67 per cent	13 per cent
P14B: General (tops of buildings)	67 per cent	33 per cent	79 per cent	18 per cent
P14C: General (illuminated signs)	67 per cent	33 per cent	74 per cent	8 per cent
P14D: General (business that cease trading)	67 per cent	33 per cent	58 per cent	37 per cent
P15: Controls and approvals	0 per cent	100 per cent	52 per cent	24 per cent
P16: Enforcement powers and penalties, and savings	0 per cent	100 per cent	62 per cent	7 per cent

Note: Above percentages may not add to 100 per cent because they exclude ‘don’t know’ / ‘other’ responses.

24. Key themes from the Auckland-wide feedback highlighted issues with illuminated signs (Proposal 14C), general rules for event signs (Proposal 3C), portable signs (Proposal 5B) and posters (Proposal 6), and the rules for commercial sexual service signs (Proposal 13C).

25. The proposal can be viewed in the link. A summary of all public feedback is in Attachment A and a copy of all public feedback related to the local board area is in Attachment B.

Staff recommend the local board provide its views on public feedback

26. Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback by resolution, and if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 28 March 2022.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

27. Council considered climate impacts as part of the Bylaw review and proposal process. The use of signage in Auckland has minor climate implications.

28. The proposal continues to support climate change adaptation, for example by requiring signs to be secured and not able to be displaced under poor or adverse weather conditions.

29. The proposal has a similar climate impact as the current bylaws, for example illuminated signs may have a minor impact on emissions. The Bylaw however is limited in its ability to regulate for sustainability purposes. The Bylaw must be reviewed in 5 years and committee has resolved to investigate redistributing sign rules between the Bylaw and the Auckland Unitary Plan as part of the Plan’s next review (resolution number REG/2020/66) at which time illumination and sustainability issues could be examined.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

30. The proposal has been developed jointly with Auckland Transport.

31. The proposal impacts the operations of several council departments and council-controlled organisations. This includes Auckland Council’s Licencing and Regulatory Compliance Unit and Parks, Sports and Recreation Department, and Auckland Unlimited, Eke Panuku Development Auckland and Auckland Transport.

32. Relevant staff are aware of the impacts of the proposal and their implementation role.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

33. The Bylaw is important to local boards due to its impact on local governance. For example, it regulates signs about community events and signs on local facilities and parks.

34. Local board views were sought on a draft proposal in July 2021. The draft was supported in full by four local boards, 16 suggested changes and one deferred a decision. A summary of local board views and changes made to the draft proposal can be viewed in the 17 August 2021 Regulatory Committee agenda (Attachment B to Item 10).

35. This report provides an opportunity to give local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, before a final decision is made.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

36. The proposal supports the key directions of rangatiratanga and manaakitanga under the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau and Schedule of Issues of Significance 2021-2025, and the Auckland Plan 2050’s Māori Identity and Wellbeing outcome by:

· balancing Māori rights under Te Tiriti o Waitangi to exercise their tikanga and rangatiratanga across their whenua with the council’s and Auckland Transport’s obligations to ensure public safety^{^[9]}

· supporting Māori who want to make their businesses uniquely identifiable and visible

· enabling Māori to benefit from signs to promote and participate in community activities and events, share ideas and views, and engage in elections

· protecting Māori and Tāmaki Makaurau’s built and natural environments from the potential harms that signs can cause.

37. The Issues of Significance also contains key directions for council-controlled organisations to integrate Māori culture and te reo Māori expression into signage. The council group are implementing policies to support the use of te reo Māori in council infrastructure and signs. The proposal, however, does not require the use of te reo Māori on signs as there is no central government legislation that gives the council or Auckland Transport the appropriate bylaw-making powers for this purpose.

38. Mana whenua and mataawaka were notified of the proposal and given the opportunity to provide feedback through face-to-face meetings, in writing, online and in-person.

39. Five individuals identifying as Māori (6 per cent of submitters) provided feedback.

40. There was majority support for Proposals 3A, 3C, 4, 5A, 5B, 6, 7B, 8, 11B, 12, 14A, 14B, 15 and 16, split support (50 per cent) for Proposals 1, 2A, 3B, 7A, 11A, 13A, 13B and 14C, and majority opposition to Proposals 2B, 9, 13C and 14D. Opinions about the remaining proposals were mixed, with no clear majority of respondents in support or opposition.

41. In contrast, there was majority support for all proposals except for Proposals 9 and 13A from all people who provided feedback Auckland-wide.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

42. There are no financial implications arising from decisions sought in this report. Costs associated with the special consultative procedure and Bylaw implementation will be met within existing budgets.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

43. The following risk has been identified:

If...	Then...	Mitigation
The feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people.	The feedback may not reflect the views of the whole community.	This risk is mitigated by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

44. On 28 March 2022 the Bylaw Panel will consider all formal local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body and the Auckland Transport Board in April 2022. The Governing Body and the Auckland Transport Board will make a final decision in April and May 2022 respectively.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Summary of all public feedback	569
b ⇩	Copy of local feedback from the local board area	629

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Steve Hickey - Policy Analyst

Elizabeth Osborne - Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Paul Wilson - Senior Policy Manager

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Whau Local Board

23 February 2022

Public feedback on proposal to amend Stormwater Bylaw 2015

File No.: CP2022/01120

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to a proposal to amend Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture-ā-rohe Wai Āwhā 2015 / Auckland Council Stormwater Bylaw 2015, before a final decision is made.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. To enable the local board to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to a proposal to amend the Stormwater Bylaw 2015, staff have prepared feedback summary and deliberation reports.

3. The proposal helps protect the stormwater network from damage, misuse, interference and nuisance by requiring approvals for vesting of new stormwater assets, and ensuring effective maintenance and operation of private stormwater systems.

4. Auckland Council received responses from 79 people and organisations.^{^[10]} All feedback is summarised by proposal and other matters as shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Main proposals to amend the Stormwater Bylaw 2015

Topic	Description
Proposal One	Controls on public stormwater network and private stormwater systems.
Proposal Two	Additional requirements for vesting of public assets and approvals.
Proposal Three	Approving modifications or new engineered wastewater overflow points.
Proposal Four	Restricting or excluding activities for parts of the stormwater network.
Proposal Five	Updating the bylaw wording, format, and definitions.
Other	Other bylaw-related matters raised in public feedback and other additional matters.

5. Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, and if it wishes, present those views to the Panel. Taking this approach will assist the Panel and the Governing Body to decide whether to adopt the proposal.

7. The Bylaw Panel will consider all local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body on 4 April 2022. The Governing Body will make a final decision on 28 April 2022.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendations

That the Whau Local Board:

a) tūtohi / receive the public feedback on the proposal to amend Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture-ā-rohe Wai Āwhā 2015 / Auckland Council Stormwater Bylaw 2015 in this report

b) whakarato / provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal in recommendation (a) to assist the Bylaw Panel in its deliberations

c) whakatuu / appoint one or more local board members to present the views in b) to the Bylaw Panel on 4 April 2022

d) tuku mana / delegate authority to the local board Chair to appoint replacement(s) to the persons in c) should an appointed member be unable to present to the Bylaw Panel on 4 April 2022.

Horopaki

Context

The Bylaw regulates public stormwater network and private stormwater systems

8. The Governing Body adopted Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture-ā-rohe Wai Āwhā, Auckland Council Stormwater Bylaw 2015 on 30 July 2015 (GB/2015/78), which replaced the operative and draft bylaws from the previous legacy councils.

9. The Bylaw seeks to regulate land drainage through the management of private stormwater systems and protection of public stormwater networks from damage, misuse, interference and nuisance.

The Bylaw is part of a wider regulatory framework

10. The Bylaw is part of a suite of regulatory tools used to manage stormwater and land drainage throughout the Auckland region, including the Resource Management Act 1991, Local Government Act 2002 and Local Government Act 1974.

11. The Bylaw is supported by operational guidelines and processes such as Engineering Plan Approvals. The council grants the approvals to developers for new private connections to the public stormwater network and vesting of public stormwater network for new developments.

12. Various Auckland Council teams such as Healthy Waters, Regulatory Compliance, and Regulatory Engineering work collaboratively to implement and enforce the Bylaw.

The council proposed amendments to improve the Bylaw for public feedback

13. On 26 August 2021, the Governing Body adopted the proposal to amend Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture-ā-rohe Wai Āwhā 2015 / Auckland Council Stormwater Bylaw 2015 (Bylaw) for public consultation (GB/2021/102).

14. The proposal arose from a statutory review of the Stormwater Bylaw 2015 by the Regulatory Committee in 2020 (REG/2020/43). Figure 1 describes the process for the statutory review and the proposal to amend the Bylaw.

15. The proposal seeks to better protect the stormwater network from damage, misuse, interference and nuisance, by:

· specifying controls, codes of practice or guidelines for managing the public stormwater network and private stormwater systems

· considering additional requirements for vesting of public assets and approvals under the Bylaw

· requiring approvals for modifications or new engineered wastewater overflow points into the stormwater network

· restricting or excluding certain activities for parts of the stormwater network

· updating Bylaw wording, format, and definitions.

16. The proposal was publicly notified for feedback from 22 September to 27 October 2021. During that period, council received feedback from 61 individuals and 18 organisations.

Diagram, timeline

Description automatically generated

Figure 1. Process for the statutory review and the proposal to amend the Stormwater Bylaw 2015

The local board has an opportunity to provide views on public feedback

17. The local board now has an opportunity to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal before a final decision is made.

18. Local board views must be provided by resolution to the Bylaw Panel. The local board can also choose to present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 4 April 2022.

19. The nature of the local board views are at the discretion of the local board but must remain within the scope of the proposal and public feedback. For example, the local board could:

· indicate support for matters raised in public feedback by people and organisations from their local board area

· recommend how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Feedback from people in the local board area supports the proposal

20. Two people from the local board area provided feedback summarised in Table 2.

Table 2. Support of proposal in the local board area

Proposal	Local Board feedback	Auckland-wide feedback
1: Controls on public stormwater network and private stormwater systems.	50 per cent support	60 per cent support
2: Additional requirements for vesting of public assets and approvals	50 per cent support	47 per cent support
3: Approving modifications or new engineered wastewater overflow points	50 per cent support	64 per cent support
4: Restricting or excluding activities for parts of the stormwater network	50 per cent support	48 per cent support
5: Updating the bylaw wording, format, and definitions	100 per cent support	73 per cent support

21. The full proposal can be viewed in the link. Attachment A of this report contains a draft Bylaw Panel deliberations report. Attachment B of this report contains a copy of all public feedback related to the local board area.

Staff recommend the local board provide its views on public feedback

22. Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback by resolution, and if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 4 April 2022.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

23. Effective stormwater management enhances Auckland’s response to climate change through resilience and adaptation to increased extreme weather events by regulating land drainage. Carbon emissions from constructed infrastructure can also contribute to climate change.

24. The proposal enables the council to help meet its climate change goals and align the amended Bylaw with the Built Environment priority of Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan.

25. Feedback was received in relation to the latest version of the Stormwater Code of Practice, seeking to incorporate the sea rise levels based on the climate change scenario identified in the Auckland Climate Plan. This feedback has been forwarded to the relevant council units for consideration.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

26. The Bylaw impacts the operations of Auckland Council’s Healthy Waters teams as well as teams involved in the regulation, compliance and enforcement of stormwater such as the Regulatory Engineering and Regulatory Compliance. Impacted departments have been consulted with and are aware of the proposals.

27. Healthy Waters staff have also worked closely with Watercare to ensure the amended Bylaw is consistent with the recently updated Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015.

28. Auckland Transport has also submitted its formal feedback on the proposal.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

29. Under the agreed principles and processes for local board Involvement in Regional Policy, Plans and Bylaws 2019, the Bylaw has been classified as low interest. It is also considered to be of no impact on local governance for local boards.^{^[11]}

30. Interested local boards have an opportunity to provide their views on public feedback to the proposal formally by resolution to the Bylaw Panel in February 2022.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

31. The proposal supports the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau and Schedule of Issues of Significance 2021-2025 key direction of Manaakitanga – Improve Quality of Life by managing land drainage.

32. Mana whenua were notified of the proposal and given the opportunity to provide feedback through online meetings, in writing via email, or through the online form.

33. The majority of submitters who identified as Māori supported Proposals One, Three, Four and Five. There was an even split between those who supported and opposed Proposal Two.

34. Some concerns were raised about Māori customary fishing rights when access to parts of the stormwater network is restricted. Any restrictions for health and safety reasons would be considered on a case-by-case basis with due consideration given to factors including access for cultural reasons. Further explanation on this matter is contained in the deliberations for Proposal Four.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

35. There are no financial implications for the council arising from decisions sought in this report. The cost of reviewing the Bylaw and its implementation will be met within existing budgets.

36. Public feedback raised concerns regarding the financial cost of implementing the latest version of the Stormwater Code of Practice incorporating the sea rise levels based on the climate change scenario identified in the Auckland Climate Plan. This feedback (Attachment F of the draft Bylaw Panel report) has been forwarded to the relevant council units for consideration.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

37. The following risk has been identified, shown in Table 3.

Table 3. Risks and mitigations relating to local board consideration of public feedback to the proposal

If...	Then...	Mitigation
The feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and organisations.	The feedback may not reflect the views of the whole community.	This risk is mitigated by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

38. On 4 April 2022 the Bylaw Panel will consider all formal local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body.

39. The Governing Body will make a final decision on 28 April 2022 (refer to the ‘Process to amend the Stormwater Bylaw 2015’ diagram in the Context section of this report).

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Dean Yee - Senior Healthy Waters Specialist

Authorisers

Barry Potter - Director Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Whau Local Board

23 February 2022

Public feedback on proposal to amend the Property Maintenance and Nuisance Bylaw 2015

File No.: CP2022/00612

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to a proposal to amend the Auckland Council Te Ture ā-rohe Tiaki Rawa me Ngā Mahi Whakapōrearea 2015 / Property Maintenance and Nuisance Bylaw 2015, before a final decision is made.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. To enable the local board to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to a proposal to amend the Property Maintenance and Nuisance Bylaw, staff have prepared feedback summary and deliberation reports.

3. The proposal seeks to improve the current Bylaw by removing unnecessary rules about lighting, removing expired legacy council bylaws and updating the definitions, structure, format and wording of the Bylaw.

4. Council received responses from 30 people and organisations at the close of feedback on 5 December 2021. All feedback is summarised by proposal and other matters as following:

Topic	Description
Proposal 1	Remove reference to lighting rules regulated in the Auckland Unitary Plan since November 2016
Proposal 2	Remove reference to expired legacy bylaws
Proposal 3	Update the definitions, structure, format and wording of the Bylaw
Other	Other bylaw-related matters raised in public feedback and other additional matters

5. Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, and if it wishes, present those views to the Panel. Taking this approach will assist the Panel and Governing Body to decide whether to adopt the proposal.

7. The Bylaw Panel will consider all local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body on 28 April 2022. The Governing Body will make a final decision in April 2022.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Whau Local Board:

a) tūtohi / receive the public feedback on the proposal to amend Te Ture ā-rohe Tiaki Rawa me Ngā Mahi Whakapōrearea 2015 / the Property Maintenance and Nuisance Bylaw 2015 in this report.

b) whakarato / provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal in recommendation (a) to assist the Bylaw Panel in its deliberations.

c) whakatuu / appoint one or more local board members to present the views in b) to the Bylaw Panel on 25 March 2022.

d) tuku mana / delegate authority to the local board Chair to appoint replacement(s) to the persons in c) should an appointed member be unable to present to the Bylaw Panel on 25 March 2022.

Horopaki

Context

The Property Maintenance and Nuisance Bylaw enables Council to minimise public health risk and nuisance on private property

8. The Auckland Council Te Ture ā-rohe Tiaki Rawa me Ngā Mahi Whakapōrearea 2015 / Property Maintenance and Nuisance Bylaw 2015 (Bylaw) seeks to minimise public health risks and nuisance by setting out:

· general rules about property maintenance (overgrown vegetation, deposited materials, abandoned buildings and feeding of wild animals)

· obligations for owners of industrial cooling water tower systems.

9. The rules are enforced by the Licensing and Regulatory Compliance unit using a graduated compliance model (information, education and enforcement).

10. The Bylaw is one part of a wider regulatory framework. The Bylaw does not seek to duplicate or be inconsistent with this framework which includes rules about:

· regulating vegetation on private property that can cause a danger or obstruct views in the Property Law Act 2007

· regulating litter on private property and allows for its removal based on visual amenity in the Litter Act 1979

· regulating antisocial behaviour by people entering abandoned buildings on private property in the Summary of Offences Act 1981

· regulating mechanical cooling tower systems associated with air conditioning or ventilation in the Building Act 2004.

Council proposed amendments to improve the Bylaw for public feedback

11. On 23 September 2021, the Governing Body adopted a proposal to improve the Bylaw for public consultation (Item 16, GB/2021/117).

12. The proposal arose from a statutory review of the Bylaw (see figure below).

13. The proposal seeks to minimise public health risks and nuisance on private property by:

· removing unnecessary rules about lighting as this has been regulate through the Auckland Unitary Plan since November 2016

· removing legacy Council bylaws which have expired

· updating the definitions, structure, format and wording of the Bylaw and controls to make them easier to read and understand.

14. The proposal was publicly notified for feedback from 26 October until 5 December 2021. During that period, Council received feedback from 30 people.

Process to amend the Property Maintenance and Nuisance Bylaw 2015

Diagram

Description automatically generated

The local board has an opportunity to provide views on public feedback

15. The local board now has an opportunity to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal before a final decision is made.

16. Local board views must be provided by resolution to the Bylaw Panel. The local board can also choose to present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 25 March 2022.

17. The nature of the local board views is at the discretion of the local board but must remain within the scope of the proposal and public feedback. For example, the local board could:

· indicate support for matters raised in public feedback by people from the local board area

· recommend how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

18. Two people from the local board area provided feedback to the proposal:

· for proposal one, there was divided support from the local board area, less than the Auckland-wide feedback

· for proposal two and three, there was overwhelming support from the local board area similar with the Auckland-wide feedback.

Support of proposal in the local board area

Topic	Local board feedback	Auckland-wide feedback
Proposal 1: Remove the lighting rules as these are now regulated through the Auckland Unitary Plan	50 per cent support 50 per cent ‘I don’t know’	70 per cent support 13 per cent oppose 7 per cent ‘other’ 10 per cent ‘I don’t know’
Proposal 2: Remove references to the revocation of legacy council bylaw	100 per cent support	88 per cent support 8 per cent oppose 1 per cent ‘other’ 0 per cent ‘I don’t know’
Proposal 3: Update the Bylaw definitions, structure, format, and wording	100 per cent support	86 per cent support 7 per cent opposed 7 per cent ‘other’ 10 per cent ‘I don’t know’

19. The full proposal can be viewed in the link. Attachment A of this report contains a draft Bylaw Panel deliberations report which includes a summary of all public feedback. Attachment B contains a copy of all public feedback related to the local board area.

Staff recommend the local board provide its views on public feedback

20. Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback by resolution, and if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 25 March 2022.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

21. Council considered climate impacts as part of the bylaw review and proposal process. The Bylaw and proposed amendments do not create a direct climate impact, but climate change may affect the problems regulated by the Bylaw. In particular, past and future expected higher average temperatures may worsen Auckland’s pest problem and exacerbate the growth of legionella bacteria.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

22. The proposal impacts council’s Licensing and Regulatory Compliance team who implement the Bylaw. The unit is aware of the impacts of the proposal and their implementation role.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

23. Under the agreed principles and processes for Local Board Involvement in Regional Policy, Plans and Bylaws 2019, the Bylaw has been classified as low interest and no impact on local governance for local boards. The Bylaw regulates activities on private property and has received low levels of public feedback.

24. Interested local boards have an opportunity to provide their views on public feedback to the proposal formally by resolution to the Bylaw Panel in February 2022.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

25. The proposal supports the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau and Schedule of Issues of Significance 2021-2025 in terms of kaitiakitanga (ensuring sustainable futures), in relation to environmental protection.

26. The Bylaw aims to provide some protection to public space from pests. However, two hui with Māori and a literature review of key documents did not identify specific or additional impacts on Māori outside of the defined problem. The health and nuisance issues which are the subject of the proposed amendments to the Bylaw are not identified in the Board’s ‘Schedule of Issues of Significance 2021-2025'.

27. Mana whenua and mataawaka were notified of the proposal and given the opportunity to provide feedback through face-to-face meetings, in writing, online and in-person.

28. Two people identifying as Māori provided feedback. One person supported Proposals One, Two and Three, which is consistent with the Auckland-wide feedback. The other person only provided feedback in opposition to Proposal Two.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

29. The cost of the Bylaw review and implementation will be met within existing budgets. Costs associated with the special consultative procedure and Bylaw implementation will be met within existing budgets.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

30. The following risk has been identified:

If...	Then...	Mitigation
The feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people.	The feedback may not reflect the views of the whole community.	This risk is mitigated by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

31. On 25 March 2022 the Bylaw Panel will consider all formal local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body. The Governing Body will make a final decision in April 2022 (refer to the ‘Process to amend the Property Maintenance and Nuisance Bylaw 2015’ diagram in Context).

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Draft Bylaw Panel deliberations report	709
b ⇩	Public feedback from people in the Whau Local Board area	725

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Kylie Hill - Senior Policy Advisor

Authorisers

Paul Wilson - Senior Policy Manager

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Whau Local Board

23 February 2022

Auckland Council’s Quarterly Performance Report: Whau Local Board for quarter two 2021/2022

File No.: CP2022/00747

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide the Whau Local Board with an integrated quarterly performance report for quarter two, 1 October – 31 December 2021.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. This report includes financial performance, progress against work programmes, key challenges the local board should be aware of and any risks to delivery against the 2021/2022 work programme.

3. The work programme is produced annually and aligns with Whau Local Board Plan outcomes.

4. Despite significant constraints on delivery in this quarter due to COVID-19 restrictions, delivery on the local board work programmes remains strong, with the vast majority of activities in progress or completed.

5. All operating departments (including Auckland Unlimited, but not the other CCOs) with agreed work programmes have provided a quarterly update against their work programme delivery. Activities are reported with a RAG (red/amber/green) status, with green being on track, amber being some risk or issues which are being managed, red being behind delivery or significant risk, and grey being cancelled, deferred, or merged.

6. Te Kete Rukuruku (line 3117 Māori naming and places) is the only project with a red RAG status this quarter. There has been partial delivery with some names formally adopted and gazetted. However, there has been significant delay as staff await external parties to resolve the outstanding list of proposed dual names in the Whau.

7. The financial performance report for the quarter is attached but is excluded from the public. This is due to restrictions on half-year annual financial reports and results until the Auckland Council Group results are released to the NZX on 28 February 2022.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Whau Local Board:

a) receive the performance report for quarter two ending 31 December 2021.

b) note the financial performance report in Attachment B of the agenda report will remain confidential until after the Auckland Council Group half-year results for 2021/2022 are released to the New Zealand Exchange (NZX), which are expected to be made public on or about 28 February 2022.

Horopaki

Context

8. The Whau Local Board has an approved 2021/2022 work programme for the following:

· Customer and Community Services

· Infrastructure and Environmental Services

· Plans and Places

· Auckland Unlimited.

9. The graph below shows how the work programme activities meet Local Board Plan outcomes. Activities that are not part of the approved work programme but contribute towards the local board outcomes, such as advocacy by the local board, are not captured in this graph.

Graph 1: Work programme activities by outcome

Chart, bar chart

Description automatically generated

COVID-19 restrictions

10. Auckland faced COVID-19 restrictions (Alert Level 3) from the start of the quarter to 2 December 2021, when all of New Zealand moved to the COVID-19 Protection Framework, also known as the traffic lights. Auckland went into traffic light red, moving to traffic light orange on 30 December 2021.

11. Auckland Council regional and community facilities were closed in Alert Level 3. Restrictions eased slightly in Level 3, Step 2 and from mid-November 2021 libraries and the majority of arts and community centres were reopened. Pools and leisure centres were able to reopen from 3 December 2021 when New Zealand moved to the COVID-19 Protection Framework.

12. From 23 January 2022, Auckland moved back into traffic light red setting under the COVID-19 Protection Framework, which will impact council and community-delivered event planning and programming.

13. Noting much of the quarter two commentary was completed prior to the shift back to the traffic light red setting, impacts on individual activities are reported in the work programme update (Attachment A) where practicable, with further updates to be provided in quarter three.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Local Board Work Programme Snapshot

14. The graph below identifies work programme activity by RAG status (red, amber, green and grey) which measures the performance of the activity. It shows the percentage of work programme activities that are on track (green), in progress but with issues that are being managed (amber), activities that have significant issues (red) and activities that have been cancelled/deferred/merged (grey).

Graph 2: Work programme performance by RAG status

Chart, pie chart

Description automatically generated

15. The graph below shows the stage of the activities in each departments’ work programmes. The number of activity lines differ by department as approved in the local board work programmes.

Graph 3: Work programme performance by activity status and department

Key activity updates from quarter two

16. 563 – Diverse Participation: Pacific Voices. During COVID-19 alert levels 3 and 4 the Whau Pasifika Komiti continued with monthly meetings online. Guest speakers from MBIE, Statistics NZ, Community Waitakere (Pacific liaison), Glenavon Community Hub coordinator and Engagement Advisor for the three West local boards were invited to talk about their roles and forge connections.

17. 1505 – Age friendly seniors. This new work programme activity has commenced with a number of meetings and discussions with key sector groups to initiate a collaborative approach to meeting the needs of seniors in the Whau.

18. 569 – Youth Development. The Whau Youth Board members have continued to keep connected over COVID-19 alert levels 3 and 4 through monthly online meetings and social media posts. They have designed cards with messages of support for essential workers (for distribution with a focus in New Lynn). The youth board used Tiktok and other social media platforms to showcase various spaces throughout the Whau that are accessible over summer as well as various language weeks. They also promoted Māori and Pacific COVID-19 Youth Zui and Youth Horizons’ vaccination event J.A.B. for L.A.B.

19. 579 – Event partnership fund. With a wave of cancellations of events in Quarter two, several Christmas-themed activations or low impact activities were able to take place using existing funding, including then New Lynn, Avondale, and Blockhouse Bay Christmas events. The Sirens and Sounds event was cancelled and the Indian Kite Festival postponed until 2022 resulting in a likely underspend of around $10,000 for the year. Staff recommend reallocation of this money.

20. 779 – Bike Hub (EcoMatters) The New Lynn bike hub adjusted its delivery model to resume operating from 7 October 2021, initially with a contactless service in COVID-19 alert level 3, to respond to community requests for help with bikes. Bike sales recommenced from 11 November 2021 following Auckland’s move to COVID-19 alert level 3 step 2 restrictions. In quarter two there were approximately 640 visitors, 320 bikes repaired, 75 bikes gifted or sold at low cost to the community, and 70 bikes donated to the bike hub.

21. 816 – Love your Neighbourhood provides rapid response assistance up to $500 to support volunteer-driven practical environmental initiatives. Two applications were approved during the reporting period in the Whau, totalling $1,000. The organisations that received funding support for their environmental initiatives were Whakawhiti Cycle Path Surround and West Auckland Resource Centre.

22. 24036 – Chalmers Reserve park development is an optimisation activity paid for by the sale of 37 New Windsor Road. Auckland Transport have also contributed financially and will be putting a walkway through the new park. Staff are now finalising concept plan, including review public consultation feedback, for presentation to the local board.

23. 30482 – Whau: install drinking fountains. Scoping is now complete with a drinking fountain to be installed at Sr Renee Shadbolt Park.

24. Six community lease renewals were completed, and three new community leases granted.

Activities on hold

25. The following two work programme activities have been identified by operating departments as on hold. There is no change here from the quarter one report.

· 3117 – Whau: Te Kete Rukuruku (Māori naming and places) tranche one, which is the only activity with a red RAG status. The remaining names in tranche one require external parties’ resolution and therefore not fully within staff’s control and has been significantly delayed. Discussions with iwi to reach agreement on additional names from tranche one are ongoing. Council's proposed Māori naming policy is underway and when adopted will assist on informing a way forward.

· 24210 – Miranda Reserve: renew playground and associated park furniture. Project on hold while Water Care’s Central Interceptor construction is undertaken on site. Estimate completion: late financial year 2022/2023. Site to be reinstated upon completion. In the interim, with community input, Water Care undertook to instal a temporary playground nearby to mitigate loss during construction work on site.

Cancelled activities

26. Work programme activity 30465 – Archibald Park: refurbish pontoon is no longer required as the intended works have been incorporated into minor maintenance.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

27. Receiving performance monitoring reports will not result in any identifiable changes to greenhouse gas emissions.

28. Work programmes were approved in June 2021 and delivery is already underway. Should significant changes to any projects be required, climate impacts will be assessed as part of the relevant reporting requirements.

29. The local board is currently investing in a number of sustainability projects, which aim to build awareness around individual carbon emissions, and changing behaviour at a local level. These include:

· 815 – Healthy Homes on a Budget (EcoMatters) provides education around waste minimization, water saving, energy efficiency and sustainable living were unable to be delivered this quarter due to COVID-19 restrictions, but have been deferred and will be held as soon as possible.

· 819 – Climate Action Network engages a broker to continue to build and coordinate the Whau Climate Action Network (formerly the Low Carbon Network) Activities in quarter two included the Solar for the Future webinar hosted by solar and energy specialist Barbara Elliston, and a membership drive in collaboration with council’s Live Lightly programme for December 2021. Due to the COVID-19 alert levels 3 and 4, the Hope Garden Open Day launch event has been postponed to February 2022.

30. Lines 813 (EcoMatters Environment Centre and Sustainability Hub), 782 (EcoFest West) and 816 (Love your Neighbourhood) also have a significant sustainability/carbon emission reduction focus.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

31. When developing the work programmes, Council group impacts and views are presented to the local board.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

32. This report informs the Whau Local Board of the performance for quarter two ending 31 December 2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

33. The programme of activities undertaken in the second quarter contains numerous initiatives focused on improving Māori outcomes. Many of these (in particular programming delivered by local libraries) were delayed or deferred in this quarter due to the COVID-19 restrictions, but progress on Māori outcomes continues. In particular:

· 565 – Māori Responsiveness: E Tu. Regular meetings have taken place between staff and the Kaiwhakaawe around recommendations have been achieved from Waitakere ki Tua and planning next steps. Staff from Te Kura Kaupapa Māori o Te Kotuku have confirmed that Ra Mokopuna could not be delivered this quarter due to COVID-19 alert level restrictions, but they plan to deliver the event by June 2022. The Ra Kaumatua event was delivered differently, with a welfare check, hangi, dessert and entertainment delivered to their homes. The Kelston Hub was supported to secure funding from Nga Matarae to support Māori and elders in the community.

· 1268 – Whakatipu i te reo Māori: we grow the Māori language Celebrating te Ao Māori and strengthening responsiveness to Māori. New Lynn Library continued with its online Kumu Kōrero classes during COVID-19 alert levels 3 and 4, remaining online for the rest of 2021. Participants average13 adults weekly. Also, Rongoā continued online to a core group of attendees averaging 10 per drop-in class. In person classes will restart in 2022. Blockhouse Bay Library are strengthening their Te Reo pronunciation with staff working on their individual Pepeha which they shared during COVID-19 alert levels 3 and 4.

· 3117 – Te Kete Rukuruku. Discussions ongoing with iwi to reach agreement on additional names from tranche one. Council's proposed Māori naming policy is underway and when adopted will assist on informing a way forward.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

34. This report is provided to enable the Whau Local Board to monitor the organisation’s progress and performance in delivering the 2021/2022 work programme. There are no financial implications associated with this report.

Financial Performance

35. Auckland Council currently has a number of bonds quoted on the NZ Stock Exchange (NZX). As a result, the Council is subject to obligations under the NZX Main Board & Debt Market Listing Rules and the Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013 sections 97 and 461H. These obligations restrict the release of half-year financial reports and results until the Auckland Council Group results are released to the NZX on 28 February 2022. Due to these obligations the financial performance attached to the quarterly report is excluded from the public.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

36. While the risk of non-delivery of the entire work programme is rare, the likelihood for risk relating to individual activities does vary. Capital projects for instance, are susceptible to more risk as on-time and on-budget delivery is dependent on weather conditions, approvals (e.g., building consents) and is susceptible to market conditions.

37. The approved Customer and Community Services capex work programme include projects identified as part of the Risk Adjusted Programme (RAP). These are projects that the Community Facilities delivery team will progress, if possible, in advance of the programmed delivery year. This flexibility in delivery timing would help to achieve 100 per cent financial delivery for the financial year if projects intended for delivery in the current financial year are delayed due to unforeseen circumstances.

38. Information about any significant risks and how they are being managed and/or mitigated is addressed in the ‘Activities with significant issues’ section.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

39. The local board will receive the next performance update following the end of quarter three (31 March 2022).

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Whau Local Board Integrated Work Programme update for quarter two 20212022	787
b ⇩	Whau Local Board Finance report quarter two 2021/2022 (Under Separate Cover) - Confidential

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Mary Binney - Senior Local Board Advisor
Authoriser	Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

[1] Three waters refers to drinking water, wastewater, and storm water.

[2] National Policy Statement – Freshwater Management policy 3.5

[5] Streams, springs, rivers, lakes, wetlands, groundwater, estuaries, harbours.

[6] Refer Submitter Numbers 61. 172. 214 and 240 in Attachment B.

[7] Proposed prohibited areas with majority support were Pakuranga Community Hall, St Heliers Community Library and Hall, Leigh Library and Grounds, Ti Point Walkway, Warkworth Town Hall Grounds, Onetangi Cemetery, Waiheke Island Artworks, Entrance of Goldie Bush Walkway, Lopdell Hall and House, Sandys Parade and Highwic House.

[8] Proposed restricted area with majority support was Whisper Cove (adjacent roadside parking).

[9] For example, the proposal does not apply council controlled public place rules to land under the control of the Tūpuna Maunga o Tāmaki Makaurau Authority or to internal signs not on or visible from council controlled public places or the Auckland transport system. The proposal does however apply rules to signs on marae that are visible from council controlled public places or Auckland transport system as these could have safety impacts.

[10] This included 61 individuals and 18 organisations.

[11] The decision-making responsibility for Te Arai Drainage District, the Okahuhura Drainage Area and the Glorit Drainage District was reallocated to the Governing Body on 9 December 2020 (GB/2020/140).

Chairperson	Kay Thomas
Deputy Chairperson	Fasitua Amosa
Members	Catherine Farmer
	Ulalemamae Te'eva Matafai
	Warren Piper
	Jessica Rose
	Susan Zhu

Author	Rodica Chelaru - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Adam Milina - Local Area Manager